• 12 Posts
  • 288 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 4th, 2023

help-circle

  • Friend of mine used to volunteer for the local chapter of a well-known national non-profit. He tried to explain all the technical benefits of setting up a website, yada yada. The board didn’t care and were bored.

    He finally set up a small demo on his own. Just a few screens. Ran a small test. Presented static screenshots, along with charts and stats on viewership and engagements. Had mockups of donation pages, volunteer signup screens, newsletters, etc. That was when people saw the value and got interested.

    Nobody cares about decentralized social networks, the technology, or how terrible the other outlets are. For a municipality, you may want to focus on maintaining multiple channels of communications and ways to reach and engage the most users. You could then fold the fediverse into it as one more channel. Something they should keep an eye on. They’ll need a way to post the same content to all those channels with the least effort. Something easy that a trained intern or clerk can do.

    Guarantee there will be questions of cost of setup, maintenance, and risks. May want to have some answers and slides ready.










  • Apple and Google can fix the problem. Apps are required to ask for permission to access location information. Most of the time, it’s for tracking and analytics, not anything related to the app’s functionality. That’s the data that is leaking to these data brokers.

    In those cases, if asked, user can say no, but apps keep haranguing you until you capitulate.

    Instead, the OS could add a button that says: “Yes, but randomize.” After that, location data is returned as normal, but from totally random locations nearby. They could even spoof the data clustering algorithms and just pick some rando location and keep showing returns to them, or just trade the data from one random phone for another every N days.

    You do this enough and the data will become polluted enough to become useless.








  • Out in the cloud world, several companies changed their FOSS license to prevent large cloud providers from making money off their work (eg, Terraform, Redis, Mongo, and ElasticSearch).

    Their reasoning was sound, on paper. They were spending a ton of time and money supporting a popular product and the only way to make money on it was by selling hosted services to enterprise. Then these other cloud providers would take their work for free, compete with them for the same customers, and often win.

    In almost all these cases, the FOSS developers were pilloried for changing the terms of their original license, leading to immediate forks and fragmentation of the community.

    The only outfit that I know of that survived the transition was Thingsboard. They still offer an open-source service, but they take a lot of their enterprise-only adapters and do not offer it as FOSS. Only way to get these is to sign up with their service.

    Wordpress could have taken a survey of their highest paying customers, then created features they needed behind a private hosting service. Yes, people would have been unhappy, but the core service would remain FOSS and the company would still make a lot of money.

    This whole thing has been done in the worse possible, public, mud-slinging manner. I don’t understand who benefits from the scorched-earth approach.