I have not tried this, and Solid is still early in its development, but here is code to migrate data from Google to...
I have not tried this, and Solid is still early in its development, but here is code to migrate data from Google to Solid.
https://github.com/solid/solid-takeout-import
https://github.com/solid/solid-takeout-import
Oooh, and MeWe is moving to Solid or using solid, I'm not technical though
ReplyDeleteMark Stronge, they are? Where did you see that?
ReplyDeleteMark Weinstein said that. He's working with Tim Berners Lee to move to solid I think
ReplyDelete"MeWe has ambitions to be the first social network to introduce Solid, the world wide web inventor's decentralized identity platform that could reshape the web. Berners Lee clearly believes in MeWe."
ReplyDeleteandroidpit.com - Social media without data mining? One man says it’s possible | AndroidPIT
Mark Stronge, fantastic. Thanks for finding that!
ReplyDeleteEdward Morbius fyi
ReplyDeleteShelenn Ayres Thanks.
ReplyDeleteMentioned 2 weeks ago ;-)
plus.google.com - solid-takeout-import: Import your Google Takeout (etc) data into your solid ...
(Though it's worth repeating. I'm excited.)
Edward Morbius yes and I have been unable to find protocol details, i.e. will it use federated protocols or use its own - i put out that question to devs earlier today
ReplyDeleteResponse from Friendica devs is (paraphrasing) no plans currently and it would have to become quite popular to add support for it given the AP implementation is still not stable.
ReplyDeleteSince Solid is corporate sponsored with a goal of building a profitable ecosystem (which is not necessarily a bad thing), we don't yet know if they will have their own protocol or adopt a federated one. Public language I could find is still vague. If anyone finds out more info, please share.
Shelenn Ayres, I've been starting to dive into the Solid forum, which is proving somewhat interesting. I'm not sure whether they will develop their own protocols, but they are relying heavily on WC3 standards. Given Tim Berners-Lee's background and beliefs, my assumption right now is that this is not really about making money but about protecting the future of the web.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, he just replied to a question of mine about MeWe adopting Solid and I used the opportunity to make him aware of the opportunity to try to migrate G+ users. It's a longshot since they have a ton of work on their plates and their top priority right now is developer outreach. That said, jumpstarting the platform with a bunch of (disgruntled) G+ users could be a big opportunity:
forum.solidproject.org - Is Social Network, MeWe, Really Planning to Use Solid? - The Market - Solid Community Forum
Gideon Rosenblatt while I respect Tim's work, that does not change who is sponsoring the project at MIT who is also making money from it short and long term. Opening a private social network to public access without an account that can be monetized is antithetical to MeWe's business model. Solid is not being sponsored for no profits as well. There must be a monetization plan in place for it to have the level of corporate sponsorship it has from Inrupt Inc. which by the way is very aware of G+ considering who is running Inrupt. I prefer companies are ethical and transparent. It does not bode well with me to see vague language and hidden fees for both. It creates a distrust up front.
ReplyDeleteShelenn Ayres Thanks.
ReplyDeleteShelenn Ayres Who are the sponsors / what is he funding mechanism?
ReplyDeleteEdward Morbius Tim is a co-founder of the company Inrupt who is funding the project at MIT.
ReplyDeleteinrupt.com - Meet the "inrupters"
https://www.inrupt.com/our-work/
https://solid.mit.edu/
Shelenn Ayres, um, where are you seeing hidden fees? If you're talking about MeWe, that is not the same as Solid or Inrupt.
ReplyDeleteInrupt is meant as a catalyst for the platform, a kind of proving ground if you will. But the underlying technology is meant to be decentralized and open to anyone to use.
A good background video:
youtube.com - Log Lounge — Decentralized Web Summit 2018 — Day 2
And there are no hidden fees with MeWe anyway. They are very up front about it
ReplyDeleteGideon Rosenblatt Inrupt has not spelled out its products and services pricing on a clear page as of yet. Neither has MeWe last I looked. What do I consider clear? Perfectly clear pricing for products and services itemized ideally. But at minimum, a pricing list of products and services like Google has for GSuite is acceptable. Nickel and diming micropurchases turn me off in general but are ok if clearly denoted.
ReplyDeleteI do not see that in either at this point much like other sites that want the opportunity to sell to you rather than offer you the opportunity to buy from them. I am pretty much anti-salespeople - they waste too much of my time which I value greatly as a cancer survivor. If I think something is worth buying I want to see the price everyone pays without having to speak to anyone. If it is micropurchases (what I call nickel and diming like charging for end to end encryption, storage space, pages, etc), it should be clearly denoted on an easy to find web page - not rambled about without pricing in an unprofessional video from a living room.
Even in the two videos I watched, they hinted at many other "in game" type micropurchases. Understandably per their business model, their goal is to get you in, hooked to friends, and no way to get out from under their control. If they make it harder to leave than it is to stay, the nickel and diming will be successful with most people. It won't be with me since I will only use it to communicate with certain people - my home and focus are elsewhere until their business model changes. Anything not clearly denoted I consider hidden fees.
Shelenn Ayres I can't address the MeWe situation as I just haven't dug into their service. But Inrupt is just very early on in their development. There is nothing even built yet, so I don't think it's reasonable to expect them to have clear pricing at this point. My guess, and it's just a guess, is that they will adopt a business model like WorPress.com, if you are familiar with that.
ReplyDeleteSolid is a completely different story. It's an open technology platform - not an actual business. Just as WordPress.com helps pay for WordPress.org openness, the same may be true for Inrupt and Solid -- but that's just me speculating.
At any rate, it's still really early on and I'm not here to try to convince you one way or another. That's not my business. I just feel it's important to be clear about the reality of this still being very early.
wordpress.com - WordPress.com: Create a Free Website or Blog
Gideon Rosenblatt I agree Inrupters are in early stages and that is precisely why I looked into them - I like innovation. However, I think it is an important consideration for people on G+ to know all the facts about what "neighborhood" they are looking for a new home in. Solid is in its planning stages (not its launch stage) and Inrupt is not forthcoming with that because they are pushing hype. This creates an air of suspicion about the company and the Inrupter team there as well as at MIT. If they are not honest up front because they are pushing a hyped sales pitch before the platform even exists, then there is no expectation they will be honest and ethical going forward.
ReplyDeleteShelenn Ayres, I think you are imputing nefariousness without any real basis of fact. They are trying to build momentum for the platform among developers right now and they are doing that by going out and talking about it. Inrupt too is in its planning stages (because it relies on Solid).
ReplyDeleteI really don't know where this is coming from. I mean there are plenty of suspicious companies out there, but these folks seem pretty ethically grounded to me. I mean, Tim Berners-Lee has been a consistent and very effective advocate for the open web. You can write them off in advance if you like (that's your choice), but I'm going to dig in and see where they go. I'm even considering lending a hand.
Mark Weinstein, head of MeWe just now:
ReplyDeleteGents, this is an important conversation, thank you for having it. I am excited about Solid and yes absolutely, MeWe is planning to implement Solid as soon as possible. We’ve had high level technical meetings with the Solid team, and believe with just couple of months of engineering focus we will be 100% compatible. Our privacy policy and Privacy Bill of Rights already meet the standards required for Solid. These are remarkable times as together all of us are focused on disrupting the data vacuums of the current social media establishment that are accessing our data, interfering with our privacy rights, and attempting to manipulate our minds and newsfeeds. It is an honor to be part of the Solid movement.
My reply and question:
ReplyDeleteThanks for jumping in, Mark. One of the analogies that I think might be useful is the WordPress.com and WordPress.org distinction. The .org openness is made possible, financially, by the .com hosting and add-ons revenue. That platform openness is critical for attracting 3rd party developers, which is at the heart of WordPress success.
I think there is a real opening in the market for something similar in social networks. It is one thing to build MeWe in a way that is Solid-compatible and another to build a Solid-compatible platform that is also open and hostable by third parties, even if MeWe represents the cutting edge of that hosting and differentiates through add-ons.
The opportunity to migrate a lot of Google+ users over the next ten months is very real and there is a core group of people there who could help catalyze the exodus. Do you see the WordPress analogy as a viable strategy?
Gideon Rosenblatt With regards to Inrupt, my perception is my perception. You are certainly entitled to your opinion. ;) As a business owner, I have very high standards for businesses.
ReplyDeleteWith regards to Mark, don't bother posting to me about anything he says - I have very specific reasons for my distrust of him personally.
Facts are facts. As with anything, don't listen to what a person says - watch what they do. My observations are based on facts in evidence on the websites - not by anything either said.
ReplyDeleteShelenn Ayres, that quote from Mark is not aimed at you, but others who may be interested in what is happening here.
ReplyDeleteGideon Rosenblatt Are you in any way paid or associated with Mark, Tim, Inrupt, or MeWe?
ReplyDeleteShelenn Ayres, no. Are you always this suspicious and argumentative?
ReplyDeleteGideon Rosenblatt Just looking for disclosure since your comments seemed biased towards the two services without regards to the concerns regarding other aspects. I am simply sharing my perception based on observations. My hope is to be 1) informative of facts 2) provide food for thought so that others can improve the way they conduct their businesses: with transparency and ethically. This thread was supposed to be about open source "solid" not Mark and company. I always get suspicious when I see people distracting users from the topic at hand to promote a for-profit effort that is not the topic of discussion. If that was not your intent, that statement is not directed at you.
ReplyDeleteShelenn Ayres I am not pushing WeMe in anyway (see above comment: "I can't address the MeWe situation as I haven't dug into their service."). I really don't know anything about Mark Weinstein or the company.
ReplyDeleteI am interested in Solid and I'm interested in Inrupt because they are the business that is catalyzing it. With that said, I do think that building a social media service based on the Solid platform is currently not in their scope. So I am interested in finding people interested in extending the platform to this use-case. If WeMe shows interest, then I will want to know a lot more about them and about Mark before doing anything to assist or even adopt their service.
Given that, what, specifically is your problem with Mark, if you don't mind me asking. You say you have specific reasons for distrusting him. What are they? I am genuinely curious before I spend more time looking into them.
Gideon Rosenblatt While my analysis of alternative platforms to G+ covered in my blog post
ReplyDeleteinfinitemetaverse.com - Infinite Metaverse Alliance (IMA) - Open Simulator and Social Media
has nothing to do with who owns and operates any of the services, as a business owner and a professional moderator, I encourage others to learn more about who is running a company because the world view of who runs a company is reflected in how they conduct business and treat their customers. Many who had accounts on Gab had no clue.
Regardless of my personal opinion of any business owner in this arena, any centralized social network with user generated content is an environment that provides incentives for corrupt business practices when it comes to user generated content because they are 1) for-profit 2) in control.
With a decentralized solution, what matters are the terms and what tools are afforded to users. I did an in depth analysis to select Friendica as my new "neighborhood" but have accounts on MeWe and Discord for certain reasons - think of those more as alternate spaces similar to having a desk at work or a locker at the gym - they are not "home" where I will spend the most of my time. The G+ sunset should be a wakeup call to everyone in terms of who controls your online existence.
Moving to the federated space gives me full control and ownership over costs, content, and presence. More importantly, the federated spaces by design have greater interoperablity via W3C standards but they also have less incentives for admins and owners to be corrupt by design. Time will tell if federated space developers will be able to or want to provide interconnection with Solid.
From what I read, Solid is being designed for-profit geared towards a different ecosystem Tim envisions. It does appear it could support a private social network application but will not be connected to the federated social web which will rule it out for me. Time will tell. The bad thing is, users will see the word federated used improperly for marketing hype and get suckered in only to discover it will be too difficult to leave by the time they figure out they were had by unethical business practices.
Shelenn Ayres you do understand what linked data is, right? I mean, it's the ultimate in decentralization, and it is at the heart, the very heart, of what Solid is trying to do.
ReplyDeleteI just don't get it. But l think I have to drop it now and just move on. The good thing is that we are both free to choose where we want to focus in a post-G+ world.
One thing though: you still did not address "the specific reasons" for your distrust Mark Weinstein. That's a strong statement, and to me casting dispersion like that warrants some explanation as to why.
Gideon Rosenblatt the fact that I did not answer your question you began with "if you don't mind" should imply I do mind. I was referring to your comment with my own in a broad sense.
ReplyDeleteI did not say the Solid decentralization approach is bad. I said time will tell. That does not define what tools are afforded to users or if it will adopt protocols like diaspora or ActivityPub which would facilitate it becoming part of the established decentralized federated web space. It does not even exist yet so it is a moot point.
Shelenn Ayres, uh-huh. OK. I'm done.
ReplyDeleteGideon Rosenblatt Shelenn Ayres: I've been following this with interest. You're both raising good points, if pushing hard at each other. My suggestion is giving this a rest for a day or three and coming back to this fresh. Something G+ supports well.
ReplyDelete(I've been ... tending fires elsewhere largely today.)
Nah, I'm good, Edward Morbius.
ReplyDeleteEdward Morbius A lot is lost without voice inflection and body language. There is zero stress, conflict, anger, emotion, etc behind my posts today. I was actually enjoying intelligent conversation. I must be way off base if it wasn't LOL
ReplyDeleteI am busy back and forth caring for Mother this weekend so I did not take the time to do edits to clarify intents behind my posts like I usually do since people forget they are likely to misinterpret the intent behind a text response.
Gideon Rosenblatt let me be blunt since someone else seems to perceive there is a conflict ... I withhold personal opinions so that others can form their own opinions based on available information. It is not my intent to bias anyone with my opinion. It is my intent to encourage people to fully vet providers of private social network spaces. Informed decisions tend to have more desirable outcomes.
ReplyDeleteShelenn Ayres
ReplyDelete