Salta al contenuto principale


Techcrunch si domanda quali siano le possibili strategie di Meta riguardo al fediverso

@Che succede nel Fediverso?

Il passaggio di Meta al web sociale aperto, noto anche come fediverso, è sconcertante. Il proprietario di Facebook vede i protocolli aperti come il futuro? Abbraccerà il fediverso solo per chiuderlo, riportando le persone sulle sue piattaforme proprietarie e decimando le startup che costruiscono nello spazio? Porterà il suo impero pubblicitario nel fediverso, dove oggi clienti come Mastodon e altri rimangono senza pubblicità?

https://techcrunch.com/2024/04/25/why-meta-is-looking-to-the-fediverse-as-the-future-for-social-media/

reshared this

in reply to Poliverso - notizie dal fediverso

Niente di quello che si discute in quell'articolo ha senso, loro vedono le cose in unica prospettiva e te la vogliono imporre come l'unica accettabile.

Tanto inizieranno a manipolare il protocollo, con il tacito consenso di tutto e il pieno supporto della stampa del settore...

in reply to ❄️ freezr ❄️

@freezr

> [...]
> vedono le cose in unica prospettiva e te la vogliono imporre come
> l'unica accettabile.
> Tanto inizieranno a manipolare il protocollo [...]

Concordo sostanzialmente con questa tua lettura.

> You could imagine an extension to the protocol eventually — of
> saying like, ‘I want to support micropayments,’ or … like, ‘hey,
> feel free to show me *ads* [enfasi mia], if that supports you.’ Kind
> of like a way for you to self-label or self-opt-in. That would be
> great,”

[...]

> The podcast yielded another possible answer as to what Meta may be
> working on in the space, with a suggestion that it could bring its
> moderation expertise to the ActivityPub protocol.

Mi pare difficile non pensare che, da quanto dicono, almeno proveranno
a pressare (con estensioni del protocollo o altri metodi) per
affermare la loro visione (e scopi) dei social network.

Ciao!
C.

in reply to cage

@cage
>
> @freezr

Aggiungo questo documento che apparentemente non c'entra molto, ma mi
sembra - invece - che illustri bene come lavorano queste compagnie e
perche' producano la tecnologia con le caratteristiche che possiedono.

https://emacs.ch/@javi@goblin.band/112110512563575784

Ciao!
C.


Actually, let me use this as an example of how everything has gone wrong with web development in the last decade or so.

Dan Abramov is a very brilliant guy who is part of the Facebook's React team. He has been the most important name in the team working on React for years. And now, they are pushing for changes in React that would make it consume streams of data that updates the UI before the entire data request is completed, instead of just requesting the data and then 'painting' it once they get the reply for that request.

This is nuts. This is a micro optimization. 95% of the users won't ever notice, and those who do (people using extremely bad connections) would be much better if the site wasn't using React at all. At the same time, I'm sure half of the websites in the World who currently uses react will jump to implement this, making their code way more complex, brittle, sucking their productivity down, and in the long term, being worse for the users. Just for absolutely not even a short-term gain at all in their products.

Then why these kind of things keep happening? Because Facebook is too big. And somehow they ended being the ones in control of the most popular web-app framework used by most of the sites nowadays.

The state of the current Javascript ecosystem is what happens when you get companies with hundreds, thousands of engineers, to build sites that 15 years ago would have been built by 1/10th of that number of people. What you get is a lot of people working on a product that's actually mature already, and whose job end being going after that extra 1%, that last micro optimization that could make your site better in a very narrow set of cases. And they don't care about the complexity, because they are part of an engineering organization with literally thousands of hands to throw at any problem. Setting up your code bundler now takes hundreds of lines of code that need constant maintenance to achieve just a 5% improvement over gzipped plain JavaScript? No big deal, they have 6 people working full time on that. React switching to a different programming paradigm each two versions? Nice, now the 900 devs working in the web version has something to do for a few months.

But then small to medium teams adopt these tools. And suddenly you have a 5, 20, 50 devs team having to do the same work the Facebook web team does. Without any of the problems Facebook has to solve.

What's worse: a big share of the current JavaScript ecosystem exists just to solve problems introduced by the previous iterations. Think about it from a user perspective: does the web work any better, does Netflix, Facebook, twitter, tumblr, etc load faster, perform better than they did ten years ago? On the contrary, most of us have more powerful computers, phones. We have significantly faster internet connections. But sites are, at best, as fast as they used to ten years ago. In most cases they are even slower.

And from the engineer perspective it's not better: web development is significantly harder, more complex, slower nowadays that what it was ten years ago. Things that were trivial are now complex. Things that were complex still are. Product-wise, we are not doing anything more complex than what we were doing in early to mid 10s. But somehow now everything is harder, involves more code, everything is now orders of magnitude more complex. And it's not even making the web a better experience.

We made this mess. We made the web worse for everyone. We made our jobs harder for ourselves. It's so stupid.


in reply to cage

@cage

Perché loro sono i tecnocrati che sono una evoluzione dei burocrati.

I tecnocrati hanno pervaso qualunque ambito, e di fatto dominano tutto, non c'è un processo industriale avanzato che non si appoggia ad una infrastruttura informatica.

Persino i trattori sono la cosa più tecnologica che esista, i tecnocrati sono arrivati addirittura al controllo della produzione di cibo.

@cage