I think training by world-class experts should have more value if that value is actually recognized by the people taking the training.
This is a hard one, with advantages and disadvantages to each path, we end up in different places.
we our outreaching to Eurocrats where money is value… and yes I recognize that activitypub is in parts alien to this, so we can’t do “common sense” for THEM money is VALUE.
From parts of our community the is and will be active PUSH back agenst during outreach, I have found lots from my contacts for example. This is unlikely to change, so best to put it to one side as it’s not wrong, just not the project we are doing.
We need to ask @mathewlowry what he thinks the best path is, as he took over the last grassroots outreach and pushed it through… what are the #EU looking for next?
To be able to recognise expertise often requires some expertise
Also, I don’t think you understand the context within which bureaucrats work. That’s not a criticism: I worked as a subcontrator for the EC for 9 years and couldn’t figure it out. I had to join and go “intra muros” to really understand how the place operates (short version: barely).
Hmm, if I understand you correctly I think maybe you’re being a little unfair on 30,000 people here. Many people in the Institutions are there because they believe the EU is a positive thing, and they don’t just measure value in monetary terms.
The problem is that it’s a bureaucracy, so they’re spending taxpayers’ money, which they just cannot do without being able to justify it wrt their workprogramme (subject to democratic oversight) and with an open procurement process (subject to audit). It’s a royal pain in the neck, but the alternative is far far worse!
The good news is that this is a problem that any half-decent bureaucrat knows how to solve. If the people @aschrijver are talking about are keen to get some training, they can find an existing contract through which they can work.
And I think it’s worth insisting. If they go to the trouble of setting up a training contract, then that’s a sign that they are taking this seriously. If people here volunteer, it requires no commitment from them so there’s a good chance there won’t be any traction, and the trainers will be wasting their time. The argument needs to be made inside the EC that the fediverse is worth finding a small training budget for.
PS Sorry I hit send too soon.
I’d love to understand this better. Are you saying that there are Fedizens who don’t want mass adoption? Or did I misread?
The are different world-views, the #fediverse has a world view that is alien to the #mainstremaing of the #EU, this is obverse.
What I like about this “movement” is that the EU recognize this and has motivation to shift, if practically no understanding and actually denial of this
This is a key point, the value of the MONEY is not for us, It’s for them, so they can except value in the #openweb this is a hard path to walk for both sides, money and power both corrupt us, this is obverse, I see this all the time.
We’re talking about the people who wrote, maintain, and develop the ActivityPub specification. We’re talking about the people who write the software using it and making it evolve.
This does not require being an expert to recognize the expertise: it requires honesty.
Please stop presuming about what I know or not. I’ve been living in Brussels and dealing with the Commission and other European instances long enough to know that our political views differ, and political views within the Commission differ widely as well.
The Commission is used to pay for training, I see no reason they would not accept, especially as they have been funding the ActivityPub community for the last four years already. We are not challengers, we are « innovators », « Internet Architects », « Next Generation Internet ». Please stop trying to downplay our part here, Mathew. You know better. They are taking it seriously already.
There are people in the ActivityPub community who have been frustrated with not receiving EU funding, and made a habit to make a riot out of their stubbornness.
I apologise. I did write “I think”, not stating a canonical fact. Also, I was writing “you” in the context of the community as a whole. Maybe not everything’s targeting you? But I do apologise if you felt targeted and underestimated.
If you read my comment you’ll find I agree with you.
I wish you all the best. I felt a while back that I’m not really being much help here, and only returned because I was specifically tagged. Looks like that was a mistake, so, good luck.
@mathewlowry I would still like feedback on the process you did with the #EU after the grassroots outreach came to a stop, we need to understand where and why to PUSH and you are likely one of the people who could help with this information for action.
Remember we are “cats” on the fediverse so stick with the strokes and the scratches It’s what it is here.
@how let’s try and see people from where they are and where they want to be #4opens process.
We all won’t the EU to use activitypub and become ACTIVE members of the #openweb
We need ossified burocracy to shift to becoming more humane, this is why most of us are here, I think?
Who here does not won’t this outcome, hands up please, let’s try for consensuses.
Since this was a direct reply, this was not obvious. Apologies accepted. There’s no reason to drop the ball here except ego. Ego has been a drag in this community (and everywhere else I assume). So please, just consider we’re on the same page and working towards wide adoption of ActivityPub.
I cannot share your enthusiasm here, but in general I agree that we need to be taken seriously at EU level, and they should consider ActivityPub community work with due respect.
OK, a brief recap:
- I was doing some digital innovation consultancy work for DG CNECT and got their agreement to include a short report outlining and recommending options vis a vis the Fediverse as one of my deliverables
- I delivered it end 2021 to my client within CNECT. He was convinced that CNECT should take an active interest, but was not part of CNECT’s social media team, and so forwarded it to them.
- I didn’t hear anything back by the time I delivered my last work to CNECT some months later. Since then my client retired.
Standard professional discretion clauses mean I cannot share more than that. What I can do is reach out to them and let them know the training may happen, to see if they’re interested. However I cannot do that if I can’t tell them who they need to speak to. And @aschrijver said his informal contacts
Unless I hear otherwise, I’ll send them to Gijs.
PS @how :
Now it’s your turn to presume ;). Honestly, it’s not an ego thing. What I wrote here is the plain truth - I really don’t think I’ve been much use as (a) I’m not a developer and (b) I’m a newcomer, without the history:
While the high level of reactance and mild toxicity here doesn’t encourage me to continue trying, if I thought I could really add some value at this point it wouldn’t stop me. I met my first flame troll in 1988.
We did a very good job last time at grassroot outreach to the #EU. I think @j8ter played a KEY role in mediating the fractions, this was likely core to why it worked then and less so now.
We still have the skills and people to do a good job, if we can reach a broad consensus to why, where, how then we can still do a good job.
If we push forward as “individuals” the outcome will be a cat fight, this will impress nobody.
Do people think it’s worth trying to build a consensus to move on with grassroots outreach?
It may be that at DG CONNECT we have the same contact, i.e. the person that approached Hellekin and me to organize ActivityPub for Administrations event and with the initials JLD
@j8ter at the time worked at NLnet, but has since found a great new position working the Security space. But he may still be interested to help with this.
Having seen this conversation ongoing I have pinged my contact as well on the status of things, but haven’t received any positive or negative substantive answer. Contacting JLD is on my backlog, though.
Why cannot you share this short report? Can you reach out to the EC and ask them to share it with us?
I can’t see why we could not work on the basis of mutual trust.
Not mine to share. But I’ll ask.