@bhaugen @KevinMarks @cwebber the main difference is that #IndieWeb (as I understand it) is designed around the idea of everyone having a self-hosted homepage, which implements a bunch of simple-as-possible protocols, allowing those homepages to form a social network. Obviously quite different from the assumptions behind AP (a federation of servers, each with one or more users, each with a web or native client) or #SSB (a #P2P network of native clients that may have intermittent net access)
@strypey @bhaugen @KevinMarks @cwebber Not an expert but I don't think it's *necessarily* (although very common) about being self-hosted, it's about owning your identity and your data. e.g. https://micro.blog provides hosted services that adhere to indieweb protocols (and principles).
In some ways its closer to Hubzilla than Mastodon, IMO.
The reason I mention that (and hope I'm correct in saying so) is that I think it's vital that indieweb does not expect everyone will self-host.
@cwebber @neil @bhaugen @KevinMarks yeah, with all due respect to the IndieWeb folks, it kind of reminds me of those people who are super passionate about growing their own organic veges, or knitting cardigans, or restoring old cars, and don't seem to grasp that this is much harder and less appealing for other people than it is for them. Also that for some people, it's as achievable as performing your own brain surgery.
@neil @cwebber @bhaugen @KevinMarks this is some really good strategic thinking. But is still assumes that the end of goal is 'everyone is a commune of 1'. To me, projects like #RiseUp, #FramaSoft,#Disroot, and many others demonstrate that its possible to 'own your own data' collectively, as well as individually.
The reason we are going with personal ActivityPubs (as well as organizational ActivityPubs) is that an individual (me, for example) can participate and federate with many organizations and other individuals.
Any or all of those could be hosted by cooperatives.
But the structure matches what we see happening around us.
@bhaugen @neil @cwebber @KevinMarks sure, I am in no way opposed to individual instances. But I'm thinking about my Mum as a potential user, or even my brothers and sisters. I just can't imagine a time that they're ever going to be willing to admin their own instance. Some of them don't even admin their own devices, after years of owning computers of various kinds ;)
@bhaugen Easy hosting - yes please! Definitely part of the vision? Starting now, not in the future! For example, I'm stunned there seems to be no hosting service for Mediawik that doesn't require me to adopt the 'server admin' role - which I absolutely don't have time or priorities or brain cells for. I could really use a wiki. But no way am I going to hack CSS or install modules - no matter how well written the help files are. Life's too short.
@strypey @neil @cwebber @KevinMarks
@mayel Thanks Mayel. In fact it was at webarchitects that I was disappointed to find no 'server admin-free' package for Mediawiki. They will host. But I would have to manage the apps/modules they were hosting. Too tech and time consuming for me. Content is where my time goes.
It would be helpful to know the other side - how time consuming/costly/ill-fitting would this kind of 'tech-naive' service be, for a coop that basically offers common-carrier hosting to tech-capable clients?
I think somebody posted this here before, but it applies to this, too. How capitalism teaches everybody to exploit everybody they can possibly exploit.
I read a parable about a locksmith: Early in his career, he's not good at picking locks. It takes him a long time and is obviously a lot of effort. People who call him out can see how much work he's putting in and give him tips that reflect the effort they see. Later, he gets good at picking locks and it looks effortless, so his tips decline as he improves.
The point the author didn't intend to make is that in the US, tipping makes service seem like entertainment.
social.coop is a cooperatively-run corner of the Fediverse. The instance is democratically governed by its members, who generally share an interest in the co-op model, but topics of discussion range widely.
Our instance is supported by sliding scale contributions of $1-10/mo made via Open Collective. You must have an active Open Collective account to apply for membership; you may set one up here