Is it any service that includes the ability to federate? If so, are Matrix/XMPP/other non-ActivityPub services part of the Fediverse, or does Fediverse really just mean ActivityPub?
The context is wanting to promote a Matrix chat room on discuss.online: #online.discuss:discuss.online (see post). Does it belong in Lemmy communities like this one, !fedigrow@lemm.ee, etc? Or does it not count as part of the Fediverse?
You must log in or # to comment.
So, the term Fediverse basically refers to the ActivityPub protocol and the associated server software. Technically, it’s not just ActivityPub, but also the AT protocol and nostr. Another layer to the Fediverse, at least in my mind, is having some federation. Meaning Bluesky isn’t apart of the Fediverse, even though it’s built on the AT Protocol, because of it’s isolation. Since there’s no interaction with Lemmy, Mastodon, PixelFed, or other federated social networks, it’s not part of the Fediverse.
“federation” implies deep interconnect, a “bridge” on the otherhand is an artificial architecture of connection along narrow fragile terms.
Just because you build a bridge to the fediverse doesn’t mean you are really part of the vibrant, free core of the fediverse city center, you are just mooching out or at best trying to arrange an alliance.
When two things federate on the fediverse it is like there being two cool places in a city where there are a million different ways to connect those two places together, often in surprising and novel ways that people didn’t necessarily forsee. It also means that a fundamental level of design connections between any two things in the fediverse are durable and not subject to catastrophically breaking if any one connection in the fediverse is temporarily broken. This is NOT like a bridge at all.
A city of bridges is not a city.
So like, cool Bluesky has a bridge here now, I hope it doesn’t get knocked out by a freak act of nature I mean enshittification…
I think that ATP and nostr are sometimes included as part of the Fediverse because they both have bridges that allow connection. Without the bridges they’re isolated.
XMPP also has a working ActivityPub bridge. But I think at some point these bridges are a bridge too far.
Software like Friendica or Hubzilla that can speak multiple protocols including AP are clearly part of the Fediverse, but things that need 3rd party bridges IMHO are not, as the creators clearly do no intend them to be part of it. Otherwise Xhitter would be also part of the Fediverse as bridges exist(ed in the past at least).
Wasn’t the Twitter “bridge” just bot accounts though? It’s a bit different with Bluesky because they’ve said that they completely support bridges between AT and AP but just don’t have the resources to work on them themselves. Anyway, ActivityPub co-author Evan Prodromou gave an interview yesterday where he included Bluesky as part of the Fediverse because of the bridge.
Personally, I consider them to be both part of and not part of the Fediverse, I guess. I wouldn’t send someone there and I also kind of think they’re a bunch of dicks for re-inventing the wheel instead of contributing improvements here.
It seems like you’d say that Matrix isn’t included? It’s not ActivityPub/AT/nostr
Matrix and XMPP are federated but not part of the Fediverse, which revolves around ActivityPub. While they share the principle of decentralization, the Fediverse specifically connects platforms like Mastodon or Lemmy via ActivityPub. Promoting a Matrix room in Lemmy communities might align with shared values but doesn’t make Matrix part of the Fediverse. Bridging these ecosystems is possible but not inherent.
I’ve been following this scene for many years, back when diaspora and friendica had a reasonable shot at promoting their own protocols rather than (what would become) ActivityPub — XMPP was still on the table as a possible avenue, as well.
There were lots of projects and developers pulling towards a general, shared goal — decentralisation — but with different code bases (ah, and did they want a distributed network or a federated one? Semantics like that ate almost as much time as agreeing on shared protocols). It was by no means a given that StatusNet would evolve via PumpIO into ActivityPub.
All I’m saying is, yes, ActivityPub is definitely the de facto protocol by now, but rather than look at this from a technology POV, I think it is worth taking a broader perspective of utility.
The Fediverse is, by that definition, a network of federated and interoperable server instances. As is pointed out, Matrix and XMPP are federated protocols, just not federating with the larger AP network. Heck, even Signal used to federate before Whisper closed its server off.
Federated chat is pretty much e2e-encrypted by default — I don’t know that that has been successfully implemented in AP yet. In that regard, the fediverse is more fragmented than it needs to be.
Defining the fediverse around ActivityPub rather than the broader goal of federation and interoperability, we may lose sight of projects that are developed outside of the W3C, and might be the future of the fediverse.
Its a series of tubes
According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fediverse:
The majority of Fediverse platforms are based on free and open-source software, and create connections between servers using the ActivityPub protocol. Some software still supports older federation protocols as well, such as OStatus, the Diaspora protocol and Zot. Diaspora* is the only actively developed software project classified under the original definition of Fediverse that does not support ActivityPub.[5][6]
You would have to look at those citations to see how authoritative they are. This may also still be open to interpretation?
So … not the combined works (verses) of the famous poet Fedy?
If anyone asks me this, I’m going to tell them I don’t know but I’m figuring it out as I go along.
The fediverse originally had nothing to do with ActivityPub. Diaspora and ostatus were, and still are a part of it.
Although, the term seems to typically fixate on social networking.
