[tor-talk] Facebook brute forcing hidden services

[rysiek]

Dnia niedziela, 2 listopada 2014 19:10:46 piszesz:
> > okay, fuck that, I'm going to dive in, because the level of FUD is
> > strong in this one.
> 
> Well, thanks :)

Always a pleasure.

> > The question is not "which protocol is better", because while we
> > bikeshed on
> > this question, people are still sitting on Failbroke and Shitter,
> > instead of
> > moving out of these walled gardens.
> > 
> > The question is: "how can we *cooperate* to get people on the libre,
> > federated
> > side of social networks". 1.5 year ago I submitted to all the
> > fedsocnet devs a
> > simple question, here's the link again:
> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fedsocweb/2013May/0058.html
> > 
> > The answer was: "impossiburu, we won't, not invented here, my
> > protocol is
> > better than yours". So instead of trying to herd those cats, I am
> > grabbing the
> > opportunity arising from the fact that we already have The
> > Federation. Let's
> > expand it and build upon it, eh?
> 
> What is your plan with The Federation ? To build a project to help all
> theses project to talk each others and find a way to "standardize" the
> communications between them to be compatible with eachothers ?

No. To have a single name for these few federated social networks that already 
federate with each other. So that instead of saying "do you have a 
Diaspora/Friendica/Red/GNU Social account?" one can say "do you have a The 
Federation account?"

Because this will:
 - make it easier for the normal users to join ("just choose any of these,
   they're compatible")
 - make it more interesting for developers of other free federated social
   networks to get compatible with The Federation ("it's not a single project,
   a few of them got together already, why not join the happy bunch")

And in the end it's all about this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_effect

Each of these projects in itself is too small to get users' attention; 
together they have much more chance of that.

> Then you will define some basic schema of authentication/packet format
> (JSON/HTML/XML…)/global architecture…
> In the end it will looks like this : https://xkcd.com/927/

Nobody needs nor wants to define nor create any new protocols. The protocols 
are already there: that's what Diaspora, Friendica, Red and GNU Social use to 
talk to each other.

The ONLY aim of calling it with a collective name is to make it seen as a 
single, huge, federated-and-federating distributed social network. And to get 
the ball rolling on more social networks joining-in and federating.

> If your aim is to ask theses project to have a public API to share
> stuffs between their different servers, well good luck.

They already do. They implement each others' protocols. Nobody has to do 
anything there. I have a Diaspora account and have added friends from 
Friendica and Red servers.

But thanks anyway.

> > Shouting "XMPP! XMPP!" is not helping.
> 
> No, but I prefer to contribute and improve a 15 years old protocol,
> with millions of users and hundred of implementations, managed by a
> strong Fundation that works with the IETF than on a 4 yo protocol
> implented by ~2 project where all the documentation you can find on it
> is here
> https://wiki.diasporafoundation.org/Federation_protocol_overview.

"I guess I'll leave that one until you answer Meredith" would be one answer. 

"I prefer to contribute and improve a ~40 years old protocol with billions of 
users and thousands of implementations (...)" and direct you to e-mail (which 
allows you to share photos and info with your friends, after all), would be 
another, admittedly snarky.

"So how is JID/Jingle client and server implementation work going", would be 
yet another.

"You're very welcome to join The Federation, if you'd like; the easiest way to 
do this would be to either help The Federation projects implement your 
protocol, or implement one of their protocols in your software; in return 
you'll get a huge bunch of active users to federate with, and the user-
perceived value of your network would rise" is the one I'm going with, 
however.

Also, Diaspora is implementing an XMPP-based chat functionality these days 
(should be released soon). So, there's also that.

-- 
Pozdr
rysiek
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 411 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20141102/f97f0724/attachment-0002.sig>