Back

@manlycoffee @J12t they do have engineers, and iirc, they have contributed to fediverse projects through collaborations.

No other fediverse project financially supports any other project (officially, to my knowledge).

Features that can't be federated are fine. Mastodon-glitch's local-only posts are one example, same with platforms with payments built in.

@thisismissem @J12t@social.coop

1. as far as company is concerned: I wasn't singling out any particular company (e.g Meta/Instagram/Threads)

2. as far as contribution is concerned: I was talking about either or, not both. It's fine if no one contributes financially.

That said, if I think about it, perhaps code contribution isn't a requirement either. Just tell us how to federate with you (e.g. if you have some JSON-LD extension, tell us how to make sense of it)

3. regarding features that can't be federated: you're right. I didn't think it through that one properly

I guess my gripe is people who sell decentralization, but just as a marketing gimmick.

Like it's fine if ActivityPub is an afterthought to explore the viability of federation, but don't tell us that you are decentralizing, when really, it was just an experiment to capture a larger market.

@manlycoffee @J12t

1. more just pointing out that expecting any company to contribute financially is wrong, at least at this stage. Fastly and to a lesser extent DigitalOcean are the only big ones to mind.

2. ditto, everyone is focused on their own projects, but collaboration does happen, we just don't necessarily see it.

I would like to see more projects present at the SWICG meetings

@manlycoffee @J12t

3. They are, but directly with a small group of developers for now. Meta is implementing a few more FEPs than others have so far, but that's actually a good thing.