I can resume this fragmentation issue by a simple sentence that I'm saying more and more these days : "If you have a problem, do not write an API, write a protocol".<div><br></div><div>The social federation protocol is already here : it's XMPP. And yes it can support everything a social network has to offer (feeds, subscriptions, profiles, contact list…). There is already millions of users on the XMPP network, and you can easily find several clients on all the plateforms for it.</div><div><br></div><div>I'm working since 2008 on the Movim project (<a href="https://movim.eu/" style="color: rgb(0, 136, 204);">https://movim.eu/</a>), to build a full, good looking, "decentralized" (federated) and open source social network on XMPP. And believe me, yes it's possible.</div><div><br></div><div>I like the link that the guy made in the presentation with Firefox. Why Firefox surpassed IE ? Because they just choose to implement the W3C standards and try to improve it (and they offer some nice features too).</div><div><br></div><div>Diaspora, GNU Social, Friendica are not trying to do that, they create their own "proprietary" protocol to talk between each other and after that face the same issues than all the others network : "Hey, we are not compatibles ! Lets create an API and the other networks will be compatible with us".</div><div><br></div><div>So keep calm and implement XMPP ;)</div><div><br></div><div>Tim</div><br>On dim., nov. 2, 2014 at 2:17 , tigrutigru@gmail.com wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><div>I've been to FSCONS today session: "Blurry line between<span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); font-size: medium;">&nbsp;private service and public infrastructure"</span></div><div>covering a problem with d<span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">ecentralised, federated services and platforms which can be used as an alternative to FB.&nbsp;</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">There are many (Diaspora, Frendica, GNU social etc) ,&nbsp;<a href="http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fedsocweb/2013May/0058.html" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">but use incompatible protocols</a>, making it hard for users to choose, and fragmenting the community, making it look weak and small. Another problem is that most of them don't have client API's and do have a sorry-looking interface.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">However, if those platforms would be compatible and talk to each other - in a session it was called "The Federation", this problem of fragmentation and poor user database is solved.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">So far is the most promising solution I heard which can help to get people of Facebook hook, or at least use it when absolutely necessary, not to post your entire life on it.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Most "evil" services we use, just need a decent easy to use functional alternative.&nbsp;</span></div><div><br></div><div>In the actual lecture the federation of decentralised social networks is described from the 28th minute <a href="https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=R_uvYp3fog4">https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=R_uvYp3fog4</a>&nbsp;</div><div><br>On 1 Nov 2014, at 17:00, <a href="mailto:cypherpunks-request@cpunks.org">cypherpunks-request@cpunks.org</a> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite">Re: [tor-talk] Facebook brute forcing hidden services</blockquote></blockquote>