<maymay> Hello all, I'll lurk but can't connect to audio
hi maymay, we'll have live minutes in here so hopefully that's sufficient
<maymay> Yeah, I'm always impressed with how these meetings are run
maymay and if you want to comment on something you can q up in here and type and someone will read it out
<maymay> OK thanks
<scribe> scribenick: rhiaro
joost: I am with NLNet
foundation, along with michiel
... we were discussing with sebastian and chris a week ago
about how to discuss proper organisaed advocacy for efforts
like activitypub
... in the context of eu political efforts for interop
guidelines and legislation
... some information has been announced as part of the digital
services act which has politically vague statements on the roll
of platforms in the digital market
... which can sometimes possibly result in actual guidelines or
legislation
... the goal of this talk would be how to properly organise
that
... and who will do what
sl007: you said you are unsure
about the roll of platforms - was also my concern until
yesterday reuters were able to obtain a leak
... a platform is defined by the amount of numbers, a huge
number so it will affect only a few platforms like the only the
largest ones
... which do have a state of monopoly
... and then there is a short update of german netspolitik who
analyse and talk to experts
... they are also saying that probably the most powerful
competitive instrument of the planned digital markets act could
include the possibility of imposing regulatins on platforms for
the interop of their services
... that would have immense effects on social networks
... they asked about scientific exerpts in the eu and said the
experts were overwhelmly positive and the commission has been
considering obligations for a long time
... [??] and confirmed this with colleagues.. it says that
experts agreed strongly to compulsory interoperability
... and then yesterday morning a post popped up on the twitter
blog which is a community by..
Vittorio: ... there are good
chances there will be someting on interop but we don't know how
strong
... there is pushback based on the fact the eu should not have
the powers to put these constraints onto the market
... the act seems to be based on harmonizing between member
states [??] about competition
... it's not clear what is happening, everyone who has
connections ith commissioners are trying to push .. the big
platforms will start saying it should be as weak as possible
and not too much regulation
<sl007> https://www.reuters.com/article/eu-tech-rules-idUSKBN28K28D?taid=5fd2693b2f44a80001678ce1
<sl007> [de] https://netzpolitik.org/2020/digitale-dienste-paket-was-wir-ueber-das-neue-plattformgesetz-der-eu-wissen/
sl007: we want to speak about
what tools we can use to demand, if we demand compulsory
interoperability, because maybe that's something we should vote
for as this CG.. we can say as the CG to the EU we've got a
protocol recommended by w3c and we demand compulsory interop
from you to make it a human right... then I don't know,
something like this? And maybe an open letter?
... and we should all have the fediverse users to look up their
faourite MPs/representatives in the monopolies, eg. on twitter
and send them 'I want AP for all' and if you've got other ideas
and how we can get into the process
... what I did was to speak with four different MEPs about the
situation and two fo them are very open minded and because they
are very into the subject
... Patrick Brier of the german pirate party
... he's also a judge, and Karen.. two more, one was a green
MEP and one was from the ?? party
... we've got two big groups in the EU
... and I tried to raise awareness
hellekin: what I understand you
want to do sebastian is to create activitypub EU lobby?
... which is a good idea
... I would like to discuss the possibility of extending that
to free software in general
... and I'd like yous ebastian to summairse a bit what you see
with the digital single market and how we are positioned
there
rysiek: a short remark on the
idea of sending a lot of emailt o MEPs - when we were doing
activism around the copyright directive
... I spoke with a lot of MEPs and they said this is something
we have to be careful about
<cwebber2> rysiek: mass mailing doesn't work anymore
<cwebber2> rysiek: it's interpreted as spam
<cwebber2> sl007: not advocating mass mailing
sl007: the fediverse is the power of humans and if we say people just look up your favourite MEP in twitter or facebook and try communication with them
rysiek: thank you
<Zakim> cwebber, you wanted to talk about activitypub specific lobby
cwebber2: not everyone was here
for the last meeting - we had rough consensus on a few
things
... one of them was that we wanted to advocate for a
ineroperable protocol that has at least one free and open
source software implementation but ideally more
... but one of the things we talked about was it would be
better to give recommendations of examples rather than encoding
in specific tech
... obviously I'm an AP advocate but if we had standardised in
2005 we'd have xmpp
... and tech sometimes changes, sometimes new needs appear,
like e2e encryption that might not appear previously
... so the important thing is we push for an interoperable
protocol but rather than a specific protocol
... but we can give strong examples of what to consider
... and the other thing that we had come up with in that set of
things
ian: I had one suggestion which
is that people work with national campaigning/advocacy groups
that are already very involved at national and eu levels
... off the top of my headin germany there's ccc, in the
netherlands there's bits of freedom, there are a range
... t here's an umbrella group in brussels called edri
... r ather than individuals building links themselves
... these activism groups already have these links
... they also have the idea of when different actions will ahve
the mosti mpact
... the commission is going to publish proposals next week, it
will then go to the eu parliament and member states, there will
be moments where activism will have the most impact
... when meps are considering amendments to the proposals so
you can maximise the impact of your actin by working with
people who are tracking what is happening in brussels or in the
national governments
<sl007> MEPs helping @echo_pbreyer@chaos.social / https://twitter.com/echo_pbreyer and https://twitter.com/karmel80
<maymay> (just commenting on IRC) I like the idea to push for principles rather than a specific protocol, but also see the risk that the major players just roll their own "interop" APIs that don't fulfill anybodys needs and end up with X competing protocols
<Zakim> cwebber, you wanted to talk about foo
cwebber2: we have a few things being discussed - what should be advocated for and what should we advocate
<maymay> https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/standards.png
vb: nice to see people wanting to participate but lobbying in brussels is a complex thing
<Derek_Caelin> +1 to Ian and Vittorio! Let's join the groups that have already formed
vb: i've been doing this for
years and just scratched the service. the only way we can do it
is via people wh have been doing it for 20 years
... I would strongly recommend that people in this group want
to participate, establish the brussels meeting points for the
free software comunity
... we can provide pointers for people
... we know the free software community is really diverse
... you will find big free software companies there also
... ngos that are working on this, article19, eff, we should
join forces and synchronise
... this is not about sending mass emails, i's about speaking
with the right people at the right time
... the ball is in the hand of the commision, it's good to
start talking with MEPs but they are not taking deciisions
now
... we have to make sure the initial proposal is good
... the other thing you all could do is participate in
consultaitons when they get out
... they regularly get put out
... my company openexchange we make dovecot
... we submitted a technical paper showing how interop can work
in messaging and other people did the same
... at the same time the regulation will not deal with specific
protocols
... it will take years to get the generic regulatin
approved
... then an implementation phase, with an agency tasked with
defining the protocols
... and deciding which companies meet the criteria
... but that will come.. it doesn't make sense now to pint out
specific protocols, except that there are technical means to do
it
... if platofrms say it is not possible we can say it's not
true
... I was asking derek about smes in europe making products
around fediverse. they are sensitive to economy and
companies
... proposals coming from pirate party or FSF, they already
know what they say, you have to convince the main parties
<Derek_Caelin> If the commission is focused on companies, I wonder if entities like Framasoft (peertube) should be part of this discussion?
vb: it's good to show there are
companies that create jobs around open protocols and federated
services
... this helps with the conversatives especially
... they are attentive to the economy
<Derek_Caelin> For better or for worse the Fediverse doesn't really follow a traditional business model
vb: that's the thing I would
suggest
... some of you could join [??]
eesti: we talked about existing
ngos active in digital rights, I never thougth we don't make
connections to them
... I'm active at ?? which is a member of edri(?) and also
active in CCC
... they never will focus on activitypub or the fediverse they
already have this topics of interoperability as a side note and
some of their papers
... some of their policy papers but they never will have.. not
enough to just engage with them, we also have to do things on
our own
cwebber2: somethign we didn't do
- these meetings are supposed to only be happenign with members
of the social CG.. we pulled in a bunch of people and now we've
got people here who are not officially in the social CG
... here is how you can join
<cwebber2> https://www.w3.org/community/wp-login.php?redirect_to=%2Fcommunity%2Fsocialcg%2Fjoin
cwebber2: here is a URL ^
... I request that you join, the reason is that this protects
us from patent issues. it's less risky today because we're
talking about policy, but for technical conversations it's
important
<Derek_Caelin> this page links to a login page
cwebber2: it's a straightforward process
sl007: I wanted to reply to
vittorio.. what eesti said, if we approach businesses and ngos
and interop is a sidenote, is my impression as well
... I've tried to invite edri(?) to 12 activitypub
meetings/conferences and also political discussions
... that really gave me the impression that they don't carea
bout interoperability
... privacy is their concern, which is fine
... and I would like to raise awareness that we are all
volunteers and we can't probably do it in a very professional
way
... about reaching the different parties, that's what I tried
to do
... there were 5 politicians of 5 different parties
... I did not approach the conservatives yet
... if we all somehow approach people we somehow know or
friends know I'm sure this can work
... the cheif of internet ofthe council of europe dr sylvia
gruntmann flew to dortmand to an indiewebcamp just ot learn
about open protocols
... there are some persons who do care
... about the open letter, should we write a draft?
<hellekin> +1
sl007: I can do it with whoever wants
<Zakim> cwebber, you wanted to discuss "which companies", and self-hosting
<joostagterhoek> +1
cwebber2: the bit about
regulators looking at companies... they will start focussing on
which companies are qualified to do these things.. there was an
ack that part of the prolem is that self hosters and community
run instances tend to fly under the radar
... I think the main thing we really want to be careful about
in some of this legislation is that most legislation assumes
that the only way to do things is with big players
... big players, the current structure of twitter and so on are
the only way that many people can imagine because they ahven't
been exposed to anything else
... the other thing is not accidentally creating a regulatory
moat
... where you've created regulations that only large players
can participate in
... that would be very ironic because it might actualy cut out
some of the most viable paths to accomplishing what the
regulation actually wants t do
<Zakim> hellekin, you wanted to comment on FOSDEM - OFFDEM this year
cwebber2: [??] community is just as important or mayb eeven more imporatn
hellekin: the eu asked amazon,
facebook and google and microsoft to figure out a law for
content and they came up with this time based restriction
... if you don't ut out the content within one hour you can be
liable
... which is not possible for small players
... had they asked for the community we would have come up with
a number of views based regulation
... I wanted to notify vittorio that as we did last year during
fosdem we will do offdem
... last year we had parallel small events where the AP
community gathered as well
... we will repeat the event this year
... if you want to come to brussels youc an
... and since fossdemw ill not be happening physically that
means we're not tied to specific place close to the
university
... we already have a huge place
<maymay> In case not everyone is aware, IMO the risk is that we end up with something like https://datatransferproject.dev/
hellekin: offdem will happen, I'll keep youp osted
<Zakim> cwebber, you wanted to try to talk about actionable paths: a set of goals and a set of organization-paths
cwebber2: we only have 20 mins
left
... this is a set of topics that everyone could talk about all
day
... but we want to try to move to actions
... I percieve two things that I'd like to get out of this
meeting
... one is where and under what structures are we
organising
<maymay> (so it will be important to talk about the difference between interop/federation vs just data portability)
cwebber2: two: what are we
organising to do
... I suspect 2 is easier to fill than 1
... so I want to focus on 1
... I would like everyone who has a path they'd like to talk
about to q up just to mention that
ian: work with organisations as
vittorio said that know how politics in brussels work
... it is very complicated
... it's really hard to know who are the right people to talk
to at which point in the process to achieve what
... you're unlikely to achieve much if you don't do that
<Zakim> hellekin, you wanted to comment on SocialHub and PUBLIC
<hellekin> https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks https://love.public.cat/
<michiel> The wrong kind of advocacy actually works antagonistically, it can also do damage
hellekin: to mention that we've
been orgnansing on the social web and there's also something
calld public(?) that's a libre ifrastructure consortium
... which is about european advoacy for free software
<cwebber2> michiel: you are right, mind queuing yoursel to say that?
hellekin: a number of people are,
43, following this, but nothing really happened so far
... it's open
<cwebber2> I think I'll allow that to be sandwiched in-between, as moderator ;)
<michiel> I'll queue at the end
hellekin: Links ^
<hellekin> see also https://ps.zoethical.org/g/Migrators
sl007: my question is .. the
structure in the W3C, since we are a CG within W3C we basically
have no official voice. Is there any process who is discussing
policy issues like this?
... the other question is who could do what?
... researching policies or public relations, who to speak to
whom
... also what vittorio and others, if we organise with
businesses, who could speak with what business
cwebber2: I don't have an answer.. I suspect the person who does best is amy
<cwebber2> rhiaro: unfortunately I don't really have an answer either... there's often policy discussion amongst AC reps, but there's not a lot of actions that come from that because the W3C focuses on technical specs
treora: I agreed and appreciate
what vittoria and ian said, to talk to politicians about how
brussels work. I moved to brussels 2 years ago and still don't
know
... trying to get people who are on the fediverse, getting
themt o know aout the political things that are going on
... sometimes when I go to events in brussels, people like ??
... tells me you can tell me it's important but we don't see
any requests about it from the population
... maybe some people care but as long as there's no movement
that demands these things it's hard to defend doing this
... besides talking to politicians it's good if there's more
people talking about it on all social media
... anything that makes more people care is contributing to the
cause
michiel: two things.. to put in a
path
... the path is not to allow the mainstream social corporate
media to remain in place, but to create an even playing field
by having them removed because they're under legal attack and
also under cnsiderabe ethical issues
... to action from having all of these removed from public
authority
<hellekin> +1
<cwebber2> that's an interesting suggestion
michiel: to have eu removed from facebook and from twitter and no longer endorsing it and then to renew the grounds and start back filling it up with the obvious candidate to take that roll is to have something with a w3c standard behind it
<cwebber2> forcing the government to dogfood a decentralized approach
michiel: [??] too single minded in sending messages
<cwebber2> though it could possibly backfire in one way
michiel: people who feel attacked
and are annoyed and stop listening to other people because
people get associated with those people
... I'd be careful with just randomly pushing people and trying
to [???]
cwebber2: having governments eat
their own dogfood oftheir regulation by withdarwing from
centralised platforms
... could be a step in the right direction
... but could be wrong by us ecoming the centralized
platform..
... we'v ementioned a number of different paths here and a few
different organising institutions
... I thought that joost has mentioned something... we do need
to find a place.. we've got a number of directions
... how should this group of peoplecontinue to organise
... the socialcg was originally a pace for technical
discussions
... I don't believe tech and policy are separate
... but I'm not sure whether or not this needs to be spun out
into a subgroup
... it probably is helpful to get a poll, are people interested
in continued conversations?
... where do people want to organise followup *action*?
joostagterhoek: these meetings
are very insightful to get everyone's perspective
... which is useful but to set specific goals or tasks of how
to approach such a topic in an organised way in a collaborative
space
<hellekin> 0 -- We should bring this to another organization since it's not specifically about ActivityPub development.
joostagterhoek: could be a good
way to keep in touch with what everyone is doing
... and a log of what was being discussed
... take that discussion and put it into tasks anda ssign
responsibility for each task
<michiel> Internet Society might be interested
cwebber2: creatinga task list and
[??]
... who monitors the task list
... taking on that role could be an intense hobby or a full
time job..
... michiel suggested internet society I dont know much about
them
sl007: I would be interested in ian brown's perspective on what would be the perfect place to organise this
vb: to cmment, the internet society is already interested int he topic, but still working out a position
<michiel> Internet Society has European chapters
vb: they were not completely in
favour of this, as not as much as the european people, but now
it's becoming more favourable, but very heavily influenced by
american oranisation members
... this topic has been pushed by european members
... agree this is very time consuming
... there are very few paid policy peple in european free
software community
... we need if there are some organisations to stay in the
loop, and have orgs as signature of documents to send to the
european commission
... we've been doing this
... a way to stay in the loop
... if people have time there are lists to join
<treora> regarding “we’ve been doing this”, the most recent letter: https://www.article19.org/resources/open-letter-eu-commissioners-interoperability/
vb: the final option is to form an informal group or policy group pro openness, very informal, and sign stuff with that name
<hellekin> Migrators group was created just for that
<Loqi__> EU: Open letter EU Commissioners on interoperability requirements
cwebber2: the group which succeeds here would have to be one that would be.. who is stepping up to organise the next few meetings out from this one?
ian: thinking about timing
... vittorio earlier was right to say the key moments here when
it comes to activitypub may be several years in th
efuture
... they certainly will be after next year, as the eu
parliament starts debating the proposals the commision is
supposed to publish next week
... it's extraordinarily unlikely that the legislation itself
will point at specific technical standards
... legislation only changes na decade scale
... what is most likely is the legislation will at a very high
level say these large companeis must support or enable
interoperability, and leave it at that
... and leave it up to national regulators
... then will those competition authrities take legal action
against them?
... as we're seeing right now in the US for different
reasons..
... if it goes further than that it might say here's a process
by which the european commission can identify standards
... and AP might be one of those
... I've written two reports on this topic, which I said there
- EU standards have tended to come out of very government
focussed standard bodies
... here AP and AS2 would be an obvious place for government
authorities to point at
... that probably would not happen for several years from now,
this is a long game
... in terms of where people could coordinate, I'm sure that me
and vitorrio and gerben would be happy to keep anyone on this
group interested up to date on what is happening month by
month
<Derek_Caelin> Yes please!
ian: and to thinka bout ways when specific issues are coming up like signing letters or speaking at meetings to persuade MEPs to look at the issue next year we could coordinate again
cwebber2: we are over time
... we have two things that need to happen right now
... everyone here has a pretty good idea of what ought to be
happening..
... in the meanwhile nobody has given an alternative place to
coordinate so the socialcg is probably sitll the bes
tplace
... my challenge is somebody come up with a better place at the
next socialcg
... I'd like it to come from someone who is already doing the
work
... that is my request
... who is alrady doing the work who says we are aware of the
socialcg and pull in those people so we can have a community
oriented intpu into the proceses that are happening
... that's my challenge to you all
... meanwhile we need to figure out when we're going to meet
next
<hellekin> +1
<joostagterhoek> +1
<cwebber2> +1
cwebber2: +1 or -1 to say whether or not you think we need to have af ollowup meeting
<Derek_Caelin> +1
<sl007> +1
cwebber2: especially about where to organise our work
<michiel> +1
<rysiek> +1
<Zakim> hellekin, you wanted to comment on following up with email on public.cat
<Cristina> +1
hellekin: I'm ready to open a
group specificaly with the people who are here so we can follow
up organisation by email
... if you like this idea send me your email via any way you
can think of
... I put mine here
<hellekin> how@zoethical.com
cwebber2: we'll figure out the next time on socialhub
<michiel> Thanks!
cwebber2: thanks everyone!
<joostagterhoek> Thanks Amy!
<rysiek> thanks, Amy!
<Cristina> thanks, Amy!
<michiel> I would suggest changing the email address to to something that is spam harvesting proof
<joostagterhoek> Silvia Grundmann = Silvia Grundmann
thanks joostagterhoek
<sl007> thanks rhiaro thanks joostagterhoek
<sl007> Forum https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks
<sl007> Link to the Paper of Ian Brown https://www.openforumeurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Ian_Brown_Interoperability_for_competition_regulation.pdf
This is scribe.perl Revision of Date Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/use/views/ Succeeded: s/Sylvia Gruntmann/Silvia Grundmann/ Default Present: rhiaro, Sebastian, Lasse, cwebber, pukkamustard, derek, joost, christina, hellekin, rysiek, michiel, gerben, Leenaars, ian, eesti, (Derek, Caelin), (Michał, "rysiek", Woźniak), (Michiel, Leenaars), (Vittorio, Bertola), (Cristina, DeLisle) Present: rhiaro Sebastian Lasse cwebber pukkamustard derek joost christina hellekin rysiek michiel gerben Leenaars ian eesti (Derek Caelin) (Michał "rysiek" Woźniak) (Michiel Leenaars) (Vittorio Bertola) (Cristina DeLisle) cwebber2 Found ScribeNick: rhiaro Inferring Scribes: rhiaro WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found. WARNING: No date found! Assuming today. (Hint: Specify the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.) Or specify the date like this: <dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002 People with action items: WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found! Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>. Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of new discussion topics or agenda items, such as: <dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report WARNING: IRC log location not specified! (You can ignore this warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain a link to the original IRC log.)[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]