thank you very much for the offer.
It would be so nice to showcase all the 10-20 ActivityPub projects which are mentioned in the thread but it is currently unclear to us if that is wanted.
Personally I’m not affilliated with this event.
So, just hope, an organiser will contact you …
It would just be so nice if they would do it in your rooms so that policymakers directly get a fedi handle and see what would be possible.
Thanks for the great work, as other people here I am trying to understand the choice for a targeted audience here. I mean further then existing collaboration with DG DIGIT is there other reasons to not address DG CONNECT as previously suggested by as @mathewlowry .
Indeed as @hamishcampbell we would need to have webinars that would be really more concerned with community organization and users experiences rather than focusing on explaining protocols that is really not related to eu domain of concern or experience.
Maybe it would be good to think this as a 2 folded process keep up with existing technical presentation and organize another moment speaking of what fediverse is to decentralisation, and the people who inhabit it.
Both will be there, as well as COMM who controls public communication of the EC. More were invited, e.g., EDPS and JRC, etc., and also national institutions. It’s not a limited event at all.
The focus is not technical but rather historical and institutional. There’s already a fairly good amount of interest within European institutions and national institutions to embrace ActivityPub, we simply want to activate those processes and facilitate integration at all levels.
As I expressing this morning: the first webinar is very much introductory and aimed at civil servants and policy makers ; the second webinar is a bit more technical and will probably introduce current research and future work ; while the ending workshop will put interested parties in motion to implement services.
Is there a way to see who was invited and by what means?
I disagree I read all propositions as very technical but given the context it feels the only possible way.
The most important issues encompassing community organization, moderation, federation, diversity of speech and view points, targeting hate speech etc… I mean what is actually important still needs to be addressed; so indeed it feels difficult to present those issues however fundamental they are for EC representatives.
Yay, @cwebber was on board the 3D experience at rC3 too.
Maybe he can confirm that immers is awesome
Really don’t understand why European major projects should not be mentioned or showcased but there is probably a reason.
NOTE
The W3C Social CG had a formalised decision to do a forum that will federate.
Discourse is just another NGI0 vaporware. It is a SILO, not federating, from an US based internet company.
We need to do a new voting.
NOTE
“SocialHub.ActivityPub.Rocks hosts ActivityPub free software developers and enthusiasts to study and share knowledge, specify functionality together, steer the course of ActivityPub W3C Recommendation through code, conversation, consistency, cooperation…”
So we’re at the point where we have a draft version of a presentation I’ll be giving to the second webinar. It would be good if I could give a preview version of the presentation to an interested audience to make sure it lands well.
What about on Friday the 23rd at 11am EDT? I guess that’s 3pm UTC. I dunno? Maybe in this room?
(BTW, yes the time is going to be… hard for me re: the second webinar, but I can do it. I am guessing it is too late to reschedule though. It looks like it’s 4am-6am here…)
Also, there are tons of messages on this thread, fyi I am not up to date… if you need to me to be aware of a specific message, please highlight the specific message
Better to use the same BBB each time, just repost the link
Was looking at the prez and thinking why/who it’s for, with this in mind the future AP stuff is likely too abstract and could be covered by a statement that the is healthy ongoing work - then coverd more in the Q&A?
"Future
Surviving nodes going down
Content which survives nodes going down (pukkamustard’s work)
User identity surviving nodes going down
Authority model
Richer authority model work in Spritely
Networks of Consent
“networks of consent” direction
Better Moderation Directions
Enabling trust among untrusted nodes?
Expand on: not needing to require full trust, permit expanding trust even if not everyone is always safe
Deny-lists and allow-lists are useful in the short term, but in the long term lead to re-centralization
OcapPub has alternative suggestions on how to do this
We want good anti-spam and anti-harassment tools, and the best way to get towards them is more funding of that research, both technical and social research (the kind of social networks you have infulence the kind of social technologies you can make)
Norms in default city life about being cautious with strangers, but developing trust over time
Trusting someone can be scoped: I might trust someone to review my bank account who I wouldn’t trust to come to my birthday party and vice versa"
Agree. When I first got into this thread I read that "The current focus of this webinar is to showcase the ActivityPub protocols and NGI0-funded ActivityPub implementations to the EU and national administrations, and to establish a link between the ActivityPub community and the EU for longer term work", and even if the stated aim has evolved, the slides have not.
I tried leaving a couple of comments, but frankly there’s too much wrong with it: Web2 is mixed in as part of centralisation, and nowhere do they really set the promise - it’s just vague bullet points.