Gregory's Server
So why did #Mozilla, when they decided to make a splash in the Fediverse (as opposed to when they undecided and withdrew) not simply "acquire" (as far as one can in the open-source world) #Mastodon? Or at least pay @Gargron a nice salary and add people to his team?
Because they certainly would have more to show for their investment than they do now. And it would have helped the #Fediverse, too.
/cc @ted
@J12t A good question. The same can be said with Laconica/StatusNet. They didn't invest or acquire.
Like today, Mozilla simply launched their first #Fediverse instance. Made news about it. IIRC, they also had an internal instance they used to communicate with each other during events/conventions.
Today, they did the same, launched Mozilla.social (their second Fediverse instance). No investments or buy-out.
My personal take: I think, in a way, that's good. It prevents the possibility of a particular software becoming the "only" software because a big name supports or bought them out.
If, say, Mozilla bought the first Fediverse software, Laconica, it might end up as the "only" Fediverse software. And maybe, ActivityPub wouldn't be born, and neither Mastodon software itself, since everyone would more likely flock to a Mozilla-supported/funded project. 🤔 (We already are seeing issues with Mastodon software becoming far too popular (and its own popularity is biting the primary flagship server of the software).)
@J12t A good question. The same can be said with Laconica/StatusNet. They didn't invest or acquire.
Like today, Mozilla simply launched their first #Fediverse instance. Made news about it. IIRC, they also had an internal instance they used to communicate with each other during events/conventions.
Today, they did the same, launched Mozilla.social (their second Fediverse instance). No investments or buy-out.