In our report yesterday about President Biden and the White House opting in to ActivityPub federation, there were a number of responses from people wishing that the White House (and other organizations) would simply self-host their own server to be a part of the network. I agree with this sentiment, and have been thinking about the requirements that would make this kind of thing possible.

Here are my thoughts, based on my limited experience working for both tech startups and government.

Why Would Anyone Want This?

There are a number of people in the Fediverse that would like all forms of government to stay the heck away from the network, citing the problems of bringing the military-industrial-complex and surveillance capitalism to our cozy little space on the Internet. Depending on which government we’re talking about, what their policies are, and how they interact with the network, this isn’t necessarily an unreasonable reaction.

However, there are a number of benefits that bringing government to self-hosted infrastructure might bring:

• Government Officials – Communicating with and representing their constituents.
• Service Notifications – Are there outages on certain train lines? Are roads closed down? Has a natural disaster occurred?
• Bureau Interactions – interacting with municipal services, civic organizations, and emergency / non-emergency services for a variety of jurisdictions.
• Department Information – easy promotion and access to studies from, say, the Department of Labor, or the Department of Energy.
• Legislature – coverage of meeting notes, policies passed, votes on the House or Senate floor.

As of today, these things primarily exist within the domain of corporate social media. You’re more likely to see a smattering of accounts across Twitter, Facebook, and Threads, and those accounts might be pretty limited in what they’re able to actually accomplish, since they’re not even running on government infrastructure.

The fact of the matter is, being able to directly access all of the things listed above could be a boon to users of the Fediverse. Rather than trying to rely on a Facebook page or Twitter account to get necessary information, it could be seen from verified accounts on your timeline, with receipts, and would be accessible to journalists, researchers, developers, and citizens alike.

Technical and Organizational Hurdles

There are a number of hoops to jump through, so let’s talk about them. Before diving in: I’m aware of the effort being done by the European Union as well as some EU governments. I think those are great, and give us some kind of playbook to look to for examples. These musings are more focused on the United States.

Funding

The first headache with any government project is setting aside the funds and people to work on it. A political figure could introduce a bill with provisions to set aside a budget for such a program, but then there are questions pertaining to who actually carries out this effort. How much of the work is being contracted out to another business or agency? What’s the criteria for “winning” the contract, and who carries out what tasks?

Procurement

Then there’s the choice of software itself: the platform and its dependencies need to be audited, examined, and vouched for. Off the top of my head, relatively few Fediverse platforms actually fulfill this expectation: I believe that Mastodon may be one of the few that has actually gone through this process, but there may be significant differences between a security audit by a compliance group, and a security audit by a government.

Aside from choosing an official platform to stake operations on, there’s also the matter of finding an ideal third-party vendor. Currently, managed Fediverse hosting services are still in their infancy, and I’m not sure they’re up to scratch for what a government entity demands: comprehensive compliance requirements, service-level agreements, user training and onboarding materials, and promises pertaining to security upgrades and threat mitigations.

There may also be requirements for custom development, for example, integrating federal single sign-on, such as ID.me or something similar. There would also need to be a deployment strategy for various users, departments, and bureaus. It may be possible for an existing government IT provider to adopt Mastodon or another platform and develop everything needed here, but it’s much harder for any business started in the Fediverse today.

Policy

Another relatively grey area here would be the setting of policy for a US Government-run instance. Dealing with hate speech, CSAM, trolling, harassment, and other nastiness is a job and a half for ordinary instance admins, but I would imagine that this could be compounded further by hosting a government server with potentially millions of followers.

How does a government handle that kind of thing without violating the First Amendment? Does moderation even count as violating free speech, as some people believe? Is there perhaps a threshold for what’s tolerated in civil discussion?

I’m not a lawyer, and don’t have a complete answer. They might be able to get away with something similar to the Mastodon Server Covenant, in which ground rules for participation are set. Alternatively, maybe only allowing inbound federation from other government servers is an answer. I don’t know.

Tooling

One final consideration: departments and organizations are unlikely to get very far if they only have a default web interface to rely on. The Fediverse needs tools like Buffer, Fedica, and Mixpost for teams to come together and coordinate their presence in this new space. As the ecosystem evolves, we’ll likely need alternative tools and frontends to deal with emerging challenges.

It’s Still Worth Trying

I’ll be the first to admit that, looking at everything above, there’s a lot of unanswered questions. People asked why President Biden and the White House opted in to using Threads with ActivityPub federation, rather than stand up their own server. For the time being, the cost of setup, onboarding, and training is cheaper. They’re also making a smart bet by migrating to where a lot of people are, in the hopes that they will be heard by the greatest amount of potential followers.

As the Fediverse continues to grow, and both the protocol and platforms continue to evolve, my hope is that government entities might see the Fediverse as viable. One day, we may see a lot of municipal entities and departments setting up their base of operations right here on the network. I think it’s important that we continue thinking about how to get there.

The post Could the US Government Self-Host a Fediverse Server? appeared first on We Distribute.

In a surprising first, Joe Biden’s social media team enabled Fediverse integration on his Threads account today. For now, the integration is a minor gesture, as it’s only a one-way connection from Threads to the Fediverse.

As viewed from Mastodon.

That being said, the implications make for a pretty big deal: Joe Biden is the first US President to federate with the rest of the network. Even though Donald Trump is on Truth Social, which is based on Mastodon, the backend has never actually federated with another server.

You can follow President Biden and the White House below:

• President Biden: @potus
• White House: @whitehouse

Government Fedi

Over the last few years, a number of governments and officials looked to the Fediverse as the base of their online social presence. The European Union notably offers official Mastodon and PeerTube servers for followers to connect with, and the Dutch government officially uses Mastodon as well.

People familiar with the RSS publishing format may find it helpful to think of Fediverse as “Really Simple Social Syndication”. Similar to RSS an agency can publish subscribable feeds, but with the added bonus of social interaction with citizens and stakeholders.

In effect, this combines the deliverability and reach of email with the personalisation and device-alerting capabilities of social media apps.
IFTAS

Some organizations, such as IFTAS, have begun advocating towards governments currently on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook to move over. It’s still an emerging part of the network, and definitely will take some time for more organizations to set foot over here. Still, it’s a promising development and will hopefully get more public officials to think about connecting to the Fediverse.

The post You Can Now Follow President Biden on the Fediverse appeared first on We Distribute.

The presence of Threads within the Fediverse remains a polarizing and controversial subject, with a deepening divide between those that want to embrace it, and those who want to keep it out. Recently, these calls seem to be renewed, with community members even demanding that Mastodon’s flagship instance block the server.

A number of instance admins opened their Private Mentions this week to see the following message:

Hi,

Could I ask, has [your instance] now defederated threads.net?
The rules for being listed on fedi.garden will require blocking instances cited in human rights reports on genocide. This would require blocking Threads.

The rules for being listed on fedi.garden will require blocking instances cited in human rights reports on genocide. This would require blocking Threads.

Of course it’s your decision what you do, I’m asking just so I can update the fedi.garden website accurately.”

These admins had been making use of Fedi.Garden, a community index intended to point prospective new members to vetted parts of the network. Reflecting a recent policy change, the service operator began reaching out to their members.

What is Fedi Garden?

Fedi Garden describes itself as “a small, human-curated list of nice, well-run servers on Mastodon and the Wider Fediverse.” As a service, it follows in a long tradition of directories designed to help connect people to individuals or communities based on interest, location, profession, or politics.

For newcomers, an entry point for discovery can be crucial in deciding whether they stay on the network, or go elsewhere. This initial point of contact can set expectations on behaviors, norms, and other points of connection to discover.

A Change in Policy

For the most part, Fedi Garden’s long-standing policy for included instances mirrored the Mastodon Server Covenant, setting basic standards on community stewardship and admin competency. For many instances, it’s a great starting point for providing a consistent quality of life, in terms of what to expect.

Recently, the project announced the addition of a policy that every listed server will be required to block Threads.net. To be clear: the service operator is not going to defederate with instances who federate with Threads, nor are they advocating for admins to treat each other this way.

“I don’t think it’s nice to federate with a company that has been cited in multiple independent reports of massacres/genocides,” FediGarden’s operator tells us, “That’s why I’m adding the rule about not federating with such companies. If servers want to do that it’s their decision, but it doesn’t seem a nice thing to do. I can’t honestly recommend such servers.”

Why Block Threads?

Aside from the fact that Threads is a Meta product, it also appears to have policy issues that stand in stark contrast with the rest of the network: a recent report by GLAAD reveals that homophobia and transphobia have largely flourished within networks stewarded by Meta, and transphobic content still seems to flow freely from accounts like Libs of Tiktok on the platform. Similarly, Facebook’s own moderation practices have exacerbated cultural tensions to the point of promoting violence and genocide.

Threads has also remained problematic with regards to news and politics: according to The Verge, the platform’s head boss doesn’t see politics and hard news as being worth the risk. Given the platform’s aversion to political content, this could raise questions about organic discovery coming from the rest of the Fediverse to Threads.

Community Members React

Many people celebrated the change, citing the protection against vulnerable users as a valuable decision. Not everyone was happy, though: Some admins, like Cliff Wade from All Things Tech, feel uncomfortable about the fact that they hadn’t agreed to additional requirements when they joined, and now feel pressured.

“It wasn’t really about the stupid ‘I want to change the rules’ thing so to speak,” he writes, “It was all about how we as admins were approached with a bullying attitude as that’s what several other admins mentioned, long before I ever mentioned it.”

Cliff and his co-admin Kyle Reddoch are now working on their own alternative index, that doesn’t include this requirement. It’s a massive undertaking, and requires vetting communities asking permission for inclusion, and regularly checking in on community developments. Still, they’re optimistic.

“[We] are making a list on our Wiki of instance that both federate and defederate from Threads,” Kyle writes, “we feel people [should] have the choice themselves and not have someone else choose for them.”

Moving Forward

Fedi Garden’s operator has updated the rules on their site, and adjusted their lists. Various projects have been tracking FediPact adoption, such as the tracker on Veganism Social. One thing that’s important to understand, though, is that Fedi Garden and this FediPact tracker aren’t the only tools for tracking safe spaces in the network.

“FediGarden is a tiny site with a tiny following, its account has about 1% of the follower numbers of FediTips,” FediGarden tell us, “FediGarden isn’t some massive gateway onto the Fediverse, it’s just a small list of servers that are Covenant-compliant but also under a certain size, to encourage decentralisation.”

With the Fediverse being what it is, we’re bound to see more indexes and discovery tools come and go, with their own processes and policies for inclusion and promotion. There is no singular landing page for the network, nor a standard point of discovery to the network.

The post Fedi Garden to Instance Admins: “Block Threads to Remain Listed” appeared first on We Distribute.

Aral Balkan

2024-03-27 16:58:14

Dear @Gargron,

A fediverse server called Threads is violating mastodon.social’s second server rule:

“2. No racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia…
Transphobic behavior such as intentional misgendering and deadnaming is strictly prohibited.”

glaad.org/smsi/report-meta-fai…

Can you please defederate from this server to protect the trans people on mastodon.social?

Thank you.

PS. It’s run by these guys: techcrunch.com/2024/03/26/face…

#mastodonSocial #fediblock #threads #meta #mastodon #transphobia

TechCrunch is part of the Yahoo family of brands

^{techcrunch.com}

More than a few Meta employees showed up at FediForum earlier this week, doubling down on their commitment to open protocols and “being a good neighbor on the Fediverse”. While there were some demos and fruitful conversations, one public concern flew under the radar.

An eagle-eyed Threads user noticed that their status giving Pixelfed a positive mention was seemingly hidden from the tree of a public conversation. From there, coverage picked up across the network, and even made it back to Daniel Supernault, Pixelfed’s creator.

“Meta is free to do whatever they want on their platforms,” the developer mentioned, “and I hope this is a bug.”

For now, no one’s quite sure. Various people have tried to recreate the same situation with their Threads accounts, and their comments are still publicly available. We have yet to see a statement from the Threads team on the situation.

Bug or not, a vocal part of the network is apprehensive about Meta’s true intentions with the platform, ranging from pessimism on how much effort Threads is really putting in to the Fediverse, to accusations of hostile behavior. Dropping the ball like this can hurt user confidence, especially when building community goodwill is so crucial.

Prior History

Pixelfed has something of an established history with being at odds with Meta. Some of that points to Pixelfed’s form factor, which bears more than a passing resemblance to Instagram.
Left: my Pixelfed, Right: my Instagram
In the past, the project was warned by a Meta employee about using the same filter names and styles for images, citing a potential violation of Meta’s intellectual property. Pixelfed complied, and changed their image filters and styles in hopes of sidestepping the issue. It never came up again.

Pixelfed filters

Additionally, there have been situations in the past where both Twitter and Facebook have censored posts linking to open source Fediverse alternatives. Even if Threads is an effort to right wrongs of the past, these situations don’t reflect well on Threads or its parent company.

When is a bug just a bug?

For all we know right now, this is very likely an unfortunate bug. However, it’s important for the Threads team to nip this in the bud, if they really want to establish good vibes about their efforts.

FediPact is an Organized Effort to Block Meta’s ActivityPub Platform

wedistribute.org/2023/06/fedip…

On the other hand, it’s important to acknowledge that there’s a segment of the network that won’t be satisfied with an explanation, no matter how much evidence is presented. Some people will block Meta no matter what, and that’s their choice.

Regardless, we’ll keep you posted if we learn anything more.

The post Is Threads Hiding Mentions of Pixelfed? appeared first on We Distribute.

We Distribute

2024-03-22 00:56:49

Despite assurances that Threads wants to be good neighbors in the Fediverse, some think Meta might be pulling out some old tricks.

wedistribute.org/2024/03/is-th…

Is Threads Hiding Mentions of Pixelfed?

More than a few Meta employees showed up at FediForum earlier this week, doubling down on their commitment to open protocols and "being a good neighbor on the Fediverse". While there were some demos a

^{Sean Tilley (We Distribute)}