5 ms·
> Seems fundamentally flawed. Would you call your RL social presence flawed? If you're not physically with a group of friends, your social presence in their gr
by codeup 15y ago
> Seems fundamentally flawed.
Would you call your RL social presence flawed? If you're not physically with a group of friends, your social presence in their group is also "offline" physically, but you are still socially present in the group through their thoughts and conversations.
If you think, however, that the data-hungry "social" model of FB is the way to go, then yes, the FreedomBox is fundamentally flawed for you. Point being that the makers of FreedomBox think the FB model is fundamentally flawed.
- Newky 15y agoWhile that paradigm works in RL, how exactly would this translate to this freedom box idea, a 404 page? I just don't see how it will work, ok perhaps a sort of system where @ mentions or the equivalent are parallel to being in peoples thoughts while not actually being there, and the fact that your "social server" is online means you are online in the way you are online in IM. If on the other hand, you want a social page such as Facebook, this model doesn't work, as no one would be able to access your page and images or any other part thats actually on your server. Also the facebook model is not one that I think will stick and I do believe that it won't be the end all of this social game. However, I think that users running their own servers is unrealistic. How many "non-techy" users run their own servers for a blog system for example? And if this social network which we talk about is the one to replace or even supersede the facebook era, then it has to be a one click plug in situation.