Figure I should post this here as well.

hallenbeck

@tchambers @mackuba @markdarb @mmasnick @mike @snarfed.org

Exactly that

damon

@hallenbeck
Idk if Ryan is open to changing that, he wrote this before the launch https://snarfed.org/2024-01-21_moderate-people-not-code
We also had him on our podcast prior to his appearance on Dot Social, https://wedistribute.org/podcast/bridgyfed-ryan-barrett/

Evan Prodromou

@bnewbold @mmasnick

I appreciate the Apache license protections for those who use your software; that's not enough.

You need to make a written pledge as an organization that any patents you make on the work you do are freely licensed. Right now, you're putting everyone in the space at risk. We don't know if you're going to overreach and patent distributed social networking, or user profiles, or whatever.

Fortunately, you have one of the smartest patent defenders on the planet on your board.

Evan Prodromou

@bnewbold @mmasnick also, thank you so much for addressing my concerns directly instead of telling me what a bad person I am for having them.

Evan Prodromou

@deadsuperhero Hey, Sean. So, I want to address your issues directly.

First, you and your team have decided to cover both the Fediverse and Bluesky. I understand why you'd do that, and I don't think I've given you a hard time about it at all.

I've made a different decision about how I'd like to spend my time and energy. Could you maybe treat my decision with the same respect that I treat yours?

Evan Prodromou

@deadsuperhero

I don't, actually, cuss people out, insult them, or attack them when I talk about protocols.

I make the simple point that protocols are a social, not a technical, issue; that competition between products is a good thing and competition between protocols is a bad one; and that protocols that are defined in open standards bodies are vastly superior for general use than proprietary protocols defined by a single company.

Evan Prodromou

@deadsuperhero That's a hard message to hear if you're making a proprietary protocol startup, I know. And if you've invested your time and reputation on their ecosystem.

Evan Prodromou

@deadsuperhero The re-framing that Bluesky uses, instead, is that there is a vast field of social networking protocols, all effectively equal in standing, and that the comparisons to be made are technical rather than social.

Evan Prodromou

@deadsuperhero @mmasnick.bsky.social wants to frame social networking protocols as a Pinewood Derby where lots of earnest competitors are trying their dangedest to make the fastest little car.

He's not willing to face the fact that he's on the board of a company that is trying to enclose the commons, and that it's a very risky strategy.

Evan Prodromou

@deadsuperhero I really dislike how much you erase other people, companies, and organizations in the ActivityPub space when you talk to me. AP is not "my" protocol; it very literally belongs to all of us. Hundreds of people have edited, implemented, documented and debugged the ActivityPub protocol and API, and it's really unfair to try to make it all about me.

Evan Prodromou

@deadsuperhero Lastly, you ask why I don't learn from Bluesky. As I mentioned, the patent status of the AT Protocol is up in the air; because they have a proprietary protocol that has not been through an open standards process, I don't know what the patent status is on the techniques. Consequently, I've tried to avoid Bluesky; I don't have an account, I haven't reviewed the protocol documents, and I don't try to emulate the features. I can't afford to introduce patented techniques into AP.

Evan Prodromou

@deadsuperhero I do really appreciate the BridgyFed bridge, and I like being able to read posts by people who use the network.

Sean Tilley

@evan This isn’t about We Distribute or your reception of it. It’s about how you engage with people who don’t want to build on ActivityPub, along with a general unwillingness to listen to feedback about the protocol’s shortcomings. I’ve seen you literally say to people that they should build on ActivityPub, and this other thing that they’re trying to do isn’t worth anybody’s attention.

This general hostility is cancer to communities. It’s on par with RMS and the Free Software Foundation, in the sense of pursuing one form of “correctness” above all others, and berating others for not doing things your way. It’s legitimately awful from the standpoint of advocacy, and leads me to believe that you might not be the best person to serve as a community advocate.

I can’t respect that. If anything, this situation has all but taken the wind out of my sails, to the point that I’ve contemplated closing my site and leaving forever. The Fediverse is not salvageable if you’re not willing to find meaningful change within yourself.

Evan Prodromou

@deadsuperhero I appreciate your friendly advice about conveying the message. I want to let you know that I've heard it, thought about it, and probably will not follow it. I feel like it's important to hold a firm line on open standards, and to counteract the Pinewood Derby paradigm which serves a single company's goals at the expense of the rest of the Internet.

Jens Finkhäuser

@deadsuperhero @evan @mmasnick I'm not a fan of what's happening with the foundation backed by GAFAM (TL;DR), but one point is rather irritating, Sean: what you say about FEPs.

FEPs are not substantially different from RFCs or W3C documents. Your argument here, then, seems to boil down to "the entire Internet and web are embarrassing because of how they're governed".

Sean, purely on a technological level, that's a pretty bad look.

Sean Tilley

@evan Regardless of the semantics of swearing or wrapping everything in the framework of polite conversation, you generally behave in a way towards competing efforts in a to manner that is dismissive at best, and hostile at worst.

Consider your own interaction with Mike Masnick, where you say things like “I’m not here to make you feel bad about your poor decision.” Yeah, no swear words, direct insults, or personal attacks, good job! Except that it’s still petty and hostile, and largely ignores what Mike even had to say.

I personally believe that competition between protocols in the decentralized social space is a valuable thing. We can’t pretend that things are perfect or that we have all the answers, and both AT Proto and Nostr have legitimately great ideas. I’m not saying to throw the baby out with the bathwater, but a general hostility towards people who took a different approach or built a different protocol makes zero sense. There is no shame from drawing inspiration from different efforts that evolved from a unique set of needs. We all have pieces of the puzzle.

Sean Tilley

@evan Regardless of the semantics of swearing or wrapping everything in the framework of polite conversation, you generally behave in a way towards competing efforts in a to manner that is dismissive at best, and hostile at worst.

Consider your own interaction with Mike Masnick, where you say things like “I’m not here to make you feel bad about your poor decision.” Yeah, no swear words, direct insults, or personal attacks, good job! Except that it’s still petty and hostile, and largely ignores what Mike even had to say.

I personally believe that competition between protocols in the decentralized social space is a valuable thing. We can’t pretend that things are perfect or that we have all the answers, and both AT Proto and Nostr have legitimately great ideas. I’m not saying to throw the baby out with the bathwater, but a general hostility towards people who took a different approach or built a different protocol makes zero sense. There is no shame from drawing inspiration from different efforts that evolved from a unique set of needs. We all have pieces of the puzzle.

bryan newbold

@evan @mmasnick when you raised patent concerns to me in person on March 2024, I took them very seriously! which is why I reached out and had a direct call with you about your concerns that same month.

"Right now, you're putting everyone in the space at risk" is a strong statement and accusation of wrong doing on our behalf.

Sean Tilley

@evan To what degree is AT Proto proprietary? They provide specs and SDKs on their site, with reasonably good documentation. Anyone can theoretically build their own implementation. Their SDKs are dual-licensed Apache and MIT.

Is this predicated on the idea that it’s being actively developed by a corporation, and takes a cathedral rather than bazaar approach to development?

I am genuinely curious as to what you mean here, as you are the only person I’ve come across making this claim.

Evan Prodromou

@bnewbold @mmasnick I am so glad you take it as seriously as I do!

Like I said, it'd be a real relief to see a patent pledge from the corporation itself. Mike knows a lot about this topic and can help push it through at the board level.