Back

Interesting results! I am a "strongly agree".

All software that is going to federate should support ActivityPub. It is the standard for social network federation.

All social software should federate.

There were some replies that were reluctant to have commercial services on the social web.

I say, if those services are going to be around anyway, they should be federated, not siloed.

My friends and colleagues @mlinksva and @cwebber and others at Creative Commons worked on an RDF vocabulary for Creative Commons licenses.

https://creativecommons.org/ns

We should probably work on having better support for that vocabulary in ActivityPub servers, and figure out what finer-grained permissions there are.

Contrary to using Twitter or Facebook, you didn't agree to an End User License Agreement for the social web. Your rights here should be pretty broad.

As one of the signers of the Franklin Street Statement, I strongly support people using Free and Open Source Software for their social networking.

https://web.archive.org/web/20090218125143/http://autonomo.us/2008/07/franklin-street-statement/

I also strongly support people who want to control who has access to their stuff, and don't want their own instances to federate with commercial services or proprietary software services. That's why we use open standards and open source software; so everyone has that level of control.

My enthusiasm starts to wane if you don't want to let other people make a different decision, though.

I get where it comes from, but it feels like gatekeeping.