Once upon a time, FOSS enthusiasts were so concerned about Microsoft, that they recommended everyone use GMail and Google Apps.
Today the same crowd hates Google, so they recommend $SERVICE instead...
As long as $SERVICE is a provider in the cloud, on somebody else's computer, I'm shaking my head.
Many of the things being recommended are even more proprietary and locked-down than Google's stuff is!
Fighting monopolies is good. But don't lie to yourself that this helps software freedom.
@HerraBRE unless you own your own platform you're going to have the same issues everywhere. That's why I'm not rushing out to sign up for any third party anything. Deliberately going slow so I can find the right self-hosted solutions.
@CrowderSoup It's hard work!
Are you aware of yunohost.org ?
They're trying to make it easier. I haven't used their stuff myself, but I love what they're trying to do.
In some cases, like e-mail, self hosting is almost impossible due to spam filters making everything awful. In such cases, owning your domain and using a standards compliant provider are the best you can hope for, freedom-wise.
@HerraBRE @CrowderSoup I have self-hosted my email for 20 years now. Over that time it has gotten MUCH easier to manage and today there are great options out there that have gradually made the "hosting email is hard and frustrating" reputation obsolete.
At the same time ISPs have made it more difficult to self host on-premise using spam control as an excuse but also perhaps due to their own self interests, collusion with Google etc.
But you can still push ownership "down the stack" ...
... the first step as mentioned before is to own your own domain so you can switch email services without losing your email address, preferably using standards compliant services.
The next step, which is slowly getting more feasible, is to push ownership lower in the stack by hosting your own email service on an affordable VPS. After that (on premise self hosting) it gets more difficult or pricey.
But at least it contains the cloud to the OS level.
@HerraBRE Sadly, I think it was/is a very small group of individuals who care(d) passionately about non-proprietary. I firmly believe the vast majority simply wore the tabard of Libre while secretly only caring that it was free of financial cost to themselves. (Cynical Pete)
For example, why has all the FOSS people not left Twitter and flocked to Mastodon if they truly care about the issue of proprietary and lock-downs?
@HerraBRE @chuck Good callout on the contradictory statements those people made. 100% agree this is fucked up but...Look I'm going to be honest, you will not get the majority of the population to self-host. There are a ton of concerns regarding people with low income or people with no computer education. Hell, you won't even get good penetration outside of us computer geeks until this process is one-click install.
I support these efforts. But we have to compromise on the remote hosting thing because people with lower incomes are never going to be able to afford such a luxury. GMail and other "gratis" services are a tax on the poor. If the problem is hosting on a remote computer, the solution to that isn't to tacitly imply the poor buy something (a local computer for hosting). The solution to expensive HTTPS certs was Let's Encrypt! Let's think about complete penetration if we're serious about privacy, rather than remaining pure. This will require compromise on some principles of privacy, namely we will need solutions based in trust and humanity rather than a tech solution.
Minor counterpoint: computers are free! These days even the poorest have smartphones, which are extremely capable machines.
When we don't want to compromise on privacy, we do have the choice to compromise on other things, such as uptime or speed.
Check out apps like Briar, they're doing some amazing things.
My #PageKite was built to let people run websites on devices without public IPs.
So yes, but... don't rule out the tech side completely.
@HerraBRE @chuck That's absolutely fair! And mobile device software are indeed often one-click setups. We could potentially get people acclimated to the idea of using their phones or tablets as passive MX servers and other oft-remote services. That's what I mean by a humanity-based solution: changing hearts and minds by using cultural normalization (of self-hosting MX, etc) and building that trust in these services. I think it's even better nowadays since most phones are encrypted, so people may even begin to trust their own devices more than remote ones if we appeal to them in that fashion. We have the tech, let's get those people!
@HerraBRE If a service is run by a profit-driven organization I tend to shake my head a bit already as it's always only a matter of time before we become their next product...
@HerraBRE I built an open source competitor to Slack. It had most of the important features, but needed a bit of polish to make it useful to everybody.
Not much interest unfortunately. Lots of people commenting on that it was a great project, but no one was willing to help, so the project is dead at the moment.
I don't blame anyone. It takes a lot of effort to contribute to Open Source, and when a closed-source, free service it out there, of course people will use it.
@loke That sounds neat. I wanted to write such a thing for the Icelandic Pirates, when they were just getting started...
Is the code anywhere public?
@loke Wow, lisp! Cool! 😁
I'd guess that is probably part of why it was hard to find contributors.
But what mostly holds us back, is we don't have enough users. People need to be users before they care enough to contribute.
Is that where you stalled too?
@HerraBRE The server side is Lisp, and quite solid. Not much work is needed there.
It's the client side that needs work, and while it is mostly in Clojurescript, we were working on a rewrite in plain JS.
@HerraBRE I guess so. We were using it internally at the office, so we had solid number of users.
However, to make it usable by all users, there needed to be some kind of easy onboarding process (the account creation screen was terrible, for example). That was never really given any priority.
So yes, I do believe you're right. I'm sure we could have gotten a bit more visibility if we had made the stuff around the actual application prettier.
@clacke By the time our application was ready to use, those other alternatives were not as useful to us.
Since this product hasn't been actively developed for the last few years, of course the situation is different now.
I haven't really tried those products, but last I did, at least Riot was very difficult for people to use. Rocket was very buggy at the time, but I'm sure it's a lot better now.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!