My thesis on P4P is finally online!
-
{Insert Pasta Pun}replied to zelf last edited by [email protected]
@zelf where is "routing agnostic" defined?
Is that "topology agnostic routing" or something else?
-
small circle 🕊 in calmnessreplied to small circle 🕊 in calmness last edited by
As you know I 'ditched' FOSS as useful concept unless in handwavy casual chatter, and use a redefinition that is workable for a sustainable commons:
FOSS = SOSS + hobby projects
SOSS = Sustainable open social software
SOSS = Projects addressing their FSDL
FSDL = Free software development lifecycle
SOSS = Foundation of open social stackFriendly and open ecosystems that may flourish and thrive can stand on SOSS, not on shaky hobby projects that may crumble any moment.
-
@erlend oh yes! Thank you for reminding me, was planning on making a zine out of it. I'll get on that too.
Great to hear you're using Willow! Their approach to protocol design inspired a lot of the conclusions in the thesis as well ~
Checked out #weirdone last night, will try it out for sure!
Edit: ps, I skimmed the documentation and got the impression you were running over ipfs, did you switch or running a merge somehow? *research curiosity intensifies*
-
@smallcircles @erlend @tastapod exactly! This is what one of the conclusions in my thesis was about. What design principles can be made for sustainable FOSS (or rather SOSS ;D) projects to thrive? How should organizing be done?
- Small (like two people can complete it)
specific (has a scoped function)
- Achievable (completed and no need for continuous expensive maintenance)
- Documented (other people can learn about it)
- Modular (can fit in with other projects, act as a bridge or connector)All the above enable self-organizing, which is a resilient and adaptive formula for peer-for-peer as an ecosystem.
-
small circle 🕊 in calmnessreplied to small circle 🕊 in calmness last edited by
I would like to mention another imho crucial aspect. I have taken commonplace ideas of working-in-public to heart and created a variant called weaving-in-public. A very unselfish way, as you don't build a public influence sphere (influencer-style social networking):
https://discuss.coding.social/t/weaving-in-public-connecting-people-and-interests/85
Working in public is only a good practice. Insufficient. For healthy evolving commons we need working-in-commons, so we keep control and ownership "of the people, by the people".
-
small circle 🕊 in calmnessreplied to small circle 🕊 in calmness last edited by
I have been in discussions with quite a few FOSS working-in-public extremists who wanted to take the concept to its maximum extent, like operating with *complete* transparency (as a core requirement for trust), and plead e.g. for "radically transparent strategies".
That's playing poker with open cards and wondering why you always lose.
It is not a basis to live up to the dreams and ambitions to one day compete with big tech and brighter futures. It's flawed thinking.
-
small circle 🕊 in calmnessreplied to small circle 🕊 in calmness last edited by
What @zelf indicates is that there are many different contexts to take into consideration, and the context dictates the best approach. At a very fundamental basis the social context determines the meaning of information. You can have it stored in some kind of data model. I.e. data. But information and semantics make things as nuanced as you can manage and support it. How much of that we can do with tech, who knows. The social is still mostly all manual activity.
-
small circle 🕊 in calmnessreplied to small circle 🕊 in calmness last edited by
Btw we have various related subjects being discussed in social coding movement channels, subsequently in the Social experience design and Groundwork labs matrix chatrooms:
https://matrix.to/#/#socialcoding-foundations:matrix.org
https://matrix.to/#/#groundwork-matters:matrix.org
And reflections on these themes are welcome on the movement's discourse forum:
The website https://coding.social is informative, yet outdated. Should get a revamp in due time
-
small circle 🕊 in calmnessreplied to small circle 🕊 in calmness last edited by
This comment in the #SX channel directly relates to more observation re:social context:
-
@zelf hmm no, what docs did you derive ipfs from? Oh, the fact that I did a talk at the ipfs conf I guess.
Weird was never based on ipfs, but it has been prototyped using a close cousin, Iroh:
https://blog.muni.town/weird-happenings/
That’s what led us to Willow, which is now a core part of our architecture, whereas Iroh is being relegated to a more optional net-protocol for p2p connectivity.
-
@zelf >This study explores the development and implementation of Peer-for-Peer (P4P) networks, a family of open-source, peer-to-peer, and local-first communication protocols. Rooted in the principles of complexity theory and an ontological basis in complex realism, the research examines how small, modular, and community-driven infrastructures can serve as adaptive solutions in response to ecological, social, and technological crises. Through a mixed-methods approach, including interviews with nine case studies and an in-person workshop, the study identifies design principles that enable resilience and sustainability in P4P ecosystems. Findings highlight the critical role of modularity—both technical and social—in fostering self-organization, adaptability, and mutual aid within decentralized networks. The study also introduces the concept of "nested isomorphism," revealing how the structural patterns of technical systems influence the organizational structures that develop them. P4P protocols, such as Willow, Mapeo, and Scuttlebutt, demonstrate the viability of localized and distributed communication infrastructures that prioritize user agency and digital sovereignty. These systems challenge the colonial structures of global internet infrastructure by empowering communities to build and maintain their own resilient networks. This research contributes to complexity theory by expanding the understanding of self-organizing systems and isomorphic tendencies of technical and organizational structures. The research presents a framework for designing future communication infrastructures that align with principles of sustainability and inclusivity. The implications of these findings extend to the fields of open-source development, decentralized networks, and adaptive infrastructure design, offering pathways toward a more equitable and resilient digital future.
Well shit! That sounds really interesting!
#SecureScuttleButt #SSB #decentralization #torrent #p2p #fediverse #federation #foss #meshnet #meshtastic #ActivityPub #lora #iot
-
@zelf finally got around to reading it in full, very nice! Can confirm it’s very legible even to a non-academic
️
