On 3/28/10 3:05 PM, Ted Smith wrote:
While I agree that preventing users from running their own home servers
and assigning them dynamic IP addresses is wrong, it's the way it is,
and users aren't going to want to risk losing internet access or having
their connection choked just so they can run a more free social
On Sun, 2010-03-28 at 11:13 -0700, Jason Self wrote:
Matt Lee <address@hidden> wrote ..
On 03/28/2010 02:03 PM, Henry Litwhiler wrote:
I don't see why users have to be able to use commodity hosting. If we
make it easy enough, anyone can host their own GNU Social install, p2p
Because I don't believe the majority of people will.
What will they host it on? The majority of Facebook users don't have a
machine they can install their own servers on. Being able to use this
from anywhere is key for success, and that means browser based.
Plus, remember that many ISPs (at least in the U.S.) prohibit their customers
from running "servers" under penalty of cancellation.
The GNU Project should not bend itself to the whims of profiteering
It is true that most US ISPs try to limit their customers from being
anything other than a "consumer" of "content". They do this through
potentially illegal service agreements that prohibit them from sending
data, and by choking their upstream bandwidth. This is similar to how
proprietary software attempts to create a system wherein they are the
sole arbiter of computation, centrally pushing a digital world out to
The Free Software movement long ago rejected the dichotomy of
producer/consumer when it relates to software. We believe that every
user has the right to modify their own software, and to re-distribute
it. I do not see why we should accept this model when it comes to
computer-based communications and social networks. Indeed, part of the
point of GNU Social (it seems to me) is to reduce the number of
PS: This email might read very strongly, and rightfully so, because I
feel very strongly about the topics it discusses. I am angry - but at
the unjust and hierarchical structure in place in society at large, not
at anyone on this mailing list. We here are part of the solution. :-)
However, if we can find ways around such rules, we would be
doing a great service to our users - giving them the social networking
tools they need along with the freedoms they want. A hybrid solution,
incorporating the idea of a truly distributed backbone with that of an
easy and convenient user experience would be the thing we should shoot
for in this project.