@cwebber I can't even imagine how that could feel, actually
if activitypub development seems distant, the big corpos are completely alien and had never even considered anyone would approach them like that

@cwebber Sometimes it's fun to think where we all were 10 and 15 years ago and really having a strong vision for the future...so weird is right, especially on the cusp of seeing it coming together as it seems to be.

@cwebber could it be that people who are passionate about good software do a better job than people who get paid a lot to make software

@cwebber How long ago was this? So they knew this was coming and didn't care. And of course they'd have no interest in it, it goes against their core money driver. Why would management ever think they'd agree to this?

@cwebber I was wondering how you felt about all this, it must feel pretty surreal

@cwebber what standards group was that with the big players?

@cwebber embrace extend extinguish

@cwebber I remember reading your posts at the time about things like the tremendous amount of work to get from "looks finished from an outside perspective" to "standards-quality work."

And recently I've seen some folks using phrases like "I don't think the designers of ActivityPub would <X>" and I'm like, really, 'cause they're *right here*. You could just ask or go read what was written instead of inventing this mythical crew out of thin air for rhetorical purposes?

@cwebber So, it is surprising that Twitter, Facebook, Google etc. are only interested in projects generating a lot of money and are totally uninterested in any "social" projects which do not serve their interests really? Well, not all of us are taken by surprise concerning this matter.

@cwebber Good standards get created for bizarre reasons. Like ... SQL is with us because IBM and Oracle wanted to undermine Ingres.

@cwebber

First they ignore you

Then they laugh at you

Then they fight you <——-

Then you win

@cwebber

I imagine they both knew that they could exist and that they could work, and saw them as a threat.

Much as I they do now.

@cwebber

I’ve been there.

@cwebber That's their loss for making poor investment choices. They should have gotten a real job and spent less on avocado toast.

@cwebber But I do love to hear all about how Big Tech is the driving force of innovation 🙄🔫

@cwebber wow! Incredible and good of you, keep on going.

@cwebber

Usenet was a highly useful decentralized ‘platform’ used by many. It was pretty much killed when googled siloed it as ‘Google Groups’ then ignored it.

Next step- have RSS readers return to major webrowsers.

@cwebber I guess the other way of saying this was that we didn't finish the job within the time allotted.

A bunch of people at W3C went to bat for us to extend our deadline.

I'm really grateful for that extra time that got us to publication.

@cwebber interesting. Yes, it sounds like you avoided the "standards capture" risk that big corporations bring when "contributing" to standards. And the W3C, for all their great work, is flawed IMO for requiring paid membership to contribute. I prefer the IETF model (though admittedly it was decades ago that I worked on standards and for all I know IETF may have changed too).

Anyway, great work on AP!

@cwebber@octodon.social So speaking as someone who knows absolutely nothing about the W3C process,

Is there a realistic danger that Meta and the others could get the W3C to publish an updated "ActivityPub 2" recommendation that adds a bunch of corporate-friendly stuff?

@cwebber All I can say right now, is thank-you to the Social Working Group for sticking it out, and to the W3C for letting them stick it out.

It's hard to argue the working group didn't produce a significant result. This is standing on its own two feet, _without_ "big social".

That gives us the upper ground really, especially if the other players keep shooting themselves in the proverbial foot!