Skip to main content

Biomedical and Electrical Engineer with interests in information theory, evolution, genetics, abstract mathematics, microbiology, big history, Indieweb, and the entertainment industry including: finance, distribution, representation

boffosocko.com

chrisaldrich

chrisaldrich

+13107510548

chris@boffosocko.com

u/0/+ChrisAldrich1

stream.boffosocko.com

www.boffosockobooks.com

chrisaldrich

pnut.io/@chrisaldrich

mastodon.social/@chrisaldrich

micro.blog/c

 

Facebook Silences Rohingya Reports of Ethnic Cleansing http://www.thedailybeast.com/exclusive-rohingya-activists-say-facebook-silences-them

 
 

@billbennettnz @davewiner I think I mentioned to you that @Chronotope was mulling something over along these lines:
https://twitter.com/Chronotope/status/830097158665801728

I'm curious if there's a middle ground? The way that @davewiner does his blog with updating hashes throughout the day would be interesting within news distribution, that way the URL changes, but at the same time it doesn't really. Example: http://scripting.com/2017/08/17.html#a094957 (Naturally the ability to update RSS feeds over time would be useful---as he describes in this particular post--, but it would also depend heavily on how users are subscribing to their news.) In his case, the updates are categorized by day/date rather than topic or category which is what an unfolding story would more likely do in a digital news publication.

In some sense, these hashes are related to the IndieWeb concept of fragmentions: https://indieweb.org/fragmention, though in their original use case, they're meant to highlight pieces within a whole. This doesn't mean they couldn't be bent sideways a little to serve a more news-specific piece that includes a river of updates as a story unfolds--especially since they're supported by most browsers. It would be much easier to syndicate the updates of the originals out to social media locations like Twitter or Facebook this way too. Readers on Twitter, for example, could see and be directed to the latest, but still have easy access to "the rest of the story" as Paul Harvey would say.

Depending on implementation, news sites could offer a tl;dr toggle button that gives a quick multi-graph synopsis. As I recall USA Today and Digiday used to do something like this on longer pieces:
https://twitter.com/ChrisAldrich/status/632063182811467776
Here's a version of the functionality via the WayBackMachine that still works: https://web.archive.org/web/20150818075138/http://digiday.com:80/publishers/mics-social-approach-distributing-first-obama-interview/

Imagine how powerful a long running story could be with all of these features? Or even snippets of inter-related stories which could be plugged into larger wholes? Eg: The Trump Administration's handling of North Korea seen in fact snippets over time spanning months while pieces of this could be integrated into a larger Trump Administration mega-story going back to January or even the beginning of his campaign. Someone who hasn't been following along could jump back months or years to catch up relatively quickly, but still have access to more context that is often missing from bigger pieces which need to stand on their own relatively.




 

@cdevroe @johnjohnston Ideally, it would be best if people were using their own blogs for direct replies. Then *if* they choose to syndicate those responses to micro.blog, it would be best if micro.blog were able to parse that reply and see the in-reply-to mf2 class to be able to properly find and thread the conversation on micro.blog.

I tend to treat micro.blog as a feed reader of sorts, but for those who have their own blogs with webmentions (the case with this post right here), I'll definitely reply to their blog directly, though this can tend to dampen the conversation for those taking part on micro.blog, but this is the case for the disjointed conversations happening on Facebook, Twitter, etc. Sometimes it's not always easy to keep the conversation on one's own site while simultaneously playing nicely with silos.

While micro.blog is a great product that supports some interesting pieces, for those with their own sites and webmentions, it's still just another silo. The secret is to treat it the same way one would with Twitter, Facebook, or any other site you'd syndicate out to. Because micro.blog is a hybrid site sitting between the old world and the new, how you use it and interact will have to change based on whether you're using it for hosting or not and whether you support niceties like Webmentions or not.

For me It's always been easier to post the start of the thread and then go to micro.blog (or Twitter or Facebook) to continue a discussion with others knowing that I'll get the webmentions back to my site where I'll still manage to own the content. The tougher piece is for others (who also own their sites) to inject their reply via their own site into the original person's blog as well as the siloed conversation at the same time.

 

But just like Facebook has a HUGE cadre of geeky engineers who've been working for more than 10 years to make it work easily enough for your parents to use, we're the (currently small) group of geeky IndieWeb users who will eventually make it easy enough for everyone else too. ;)

I'd be willing to bet that far fewer of us in comparison can have a more dramatic effect on the web than Facebook has, even if it takes a somewhat longer timeline (and that mostly because we're all doing it on a hobby-ist basis and not full time).

 

I think a lot of the problem comes down to all of the siloed walls out there which are causing most of the friction. We're still relatively early days yet and only a tiny few are using the concept of salmention which would help keep running threads working properly. Admittedly having the context live somewhere and then having proper threaded communications isn't easy, so many do what they're able to for the moment.

I'm usually attempting to manually accomplish salmention as best as I'm able, but I may not hit every syndicated target unless you're displaying it directly. Additionally some targets just don't make sense--I'll webmention your original, for example, but this lengthy reply just won't look right at micro.blog if you syndicated a simple headline and URL there, so why bother since you'll see it at the original anyway? Others who are on micro.blog may miss out on part of the conversation, but presumably if they're looking at your copy on micro.blog, they'll be able to see the original as it was intended.

Colin, you mention that not all of your content needs to go to micro.blog. Perhaps, but to think so in my mind is part of the older silo way of thinking. The only reason you're syndicating there is as a stopgap to reach the people who don't currently have the time or luxury to be doing things the way you are. Otherwise they could subscribe to you directly at the source (and potentially even circumscribe the types of posts, keywords, or content to get exactly what they want from your site.) In some sense you syndicate there to reach and communicate with the non-IndieWeb crowd. Perhaps some of your content doesn't make as much sense there as Micro.blog is limited in what it is able to do, but that is its limitation, not yours. Eventually in a fully IndieWeb-ified world, everyone would have their own domain, their own data, and syndication of any sort won't have a real need to exist at all.

As to Jack's comment, syndicating things out to multiple places is often difficult as is getting all the responses back. (Fortunately services like Brid.gy make things far easier though they don't cover all the bases.) I do it in large part because while I prefer to own all of my content and have all the conversation take place on my personal site, I can't necessarily make that choice for everyone else. My mom is likely to never have her own domain much less a site. The only way she'll see my content (whether it's meant for her or not) is to syndicate it to Facebook. For those who aren't yet aware of the IndieWeb or using it, they're still reading and interacting on other platforms, which, for me is fine since I can still have my cake and eat it too. Eventually there will be inexpensive platforms that will let people who don't want to deal with the development cost and overhead that allow much of the IndieWeb-types of functionalities they're not currently getting from their silo platforms for free. I suspect that these will be easier and easier (as well as cheaper) to use over time. I suspect more people will use them for their freedom, flexibility, and increased control. Until then, I have the privilege of using my site much the way I would Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Google+, Flickr, GoodReads, etc., etc., I just get to do it through a more unified experience instead of having to juggle dozens of accounts and only being able to interact with my fractions of friends, family, and colleagues who coincidentally happen to be spending the time and effort to interact on those websites. As an example, I have dozens of friends who interact with me on Facebook about things I'm currently reading or finished reading, but if I was only doing this on GoodReads, they'd never have a chance to see it as they don't have accounts there or even know it exists. (Coincidentally, this is also the reason that GoodReads and most other silos allow one to syndicate their accounts to Twitter, Facebook, etc.)

Not all social sites are as lucky as Facebook to have such massive adoption. This creates a value imbalance with respect to the classic "network effect" (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_effect). Philosophically I think that an decentralized and distributed version of IndieWeb philosophies add far more value than having hundreds or even thousands of individual silos.

Invariably some people are likely to stick with Twitter, Facebook, or others because they don't have the same values I do. (Currently I suspect the majority do it because it's frictionless and easy.) But this doesn't change the fact that one can't have a "universal" conversation if one prefers. When I look at various platforms, some of them have different personalities and types of conversations because of the (possibly) self-selecting group of people on them. I loved Twitter more in the early days because of it's smaller and more engaged community--things have naturally changed drastically since those early days. Micro.blog is a bit more like it now, but to me it's not so much a social media replacement for Twitter. To me it's really a social reader that I use to quickly follow a subset of interesting and thoughtful people until I have a better social reader built into my own site. The conversation would be somewhat different if these silos were working on niche audience content like knitting or quantum mechanics, but typically they're not. Most social silos are geared toward mass adoption and broad topic discussion or content posting for everyone/everywhere. Their goal is for their site to be the proverbial "phone number and dial-tone of the web". Why do this when I already have a connection and a "phone number" that is my own site URL?

Jack, while some bloggers have turned off comments, they've often done so saying "Post your reply on your own site, or on Twitter, Facebook, etc." This has just pushed the conversation on their ideas off somewhere else which is disconnected and not as easily searchable or discoverable. And without some kind of notification mechanism, the author of the original post has no idea it exists. (I'll elide a conversation about blocking trolls and abuse here.) I've written some thoughts on comments sections in reply to such a blogger who recently re-enabled comments which also links to several interesting articles about the pros/cons of having comments at all. To me, between webmentions, spam filtering, and even moderation, we're lightyears ahead of where we were in the early 2000s.

One other thing I do find interesting is that the way all of this is set up is allowing us the ability to write extended thoughts and extended multiple replies (with civility as relative strangers). I don't think there are many sites on the web that allow this type of interaction, and they certainly don't do it with anything remotely close to the open architecture we're using. While at times it can be a headache for maintenance and problems, I find far more value in it than using anything else.

 

.@TheNextWeb has an interview/highlight story featuring my Facebook Algorithm Mom Problem article:
https://twitter.com/TheNextWeb/status/890592462552653825

 

Replied to a post on github.com :

Are birthday wishes likely the most common examples of this type of post?
eg: https://www.facebook.com/ChrisAldrich/posts/10101384341809765 (sadly the audience for this may not be public, and worse, doesn't seem to be changeable.)

 

Sure enough. Mom Likes it! ❤️

Since my post hit #1 on Hacker News and blew up the article in a whole different way, I thought I ought to change the audience setting on Facebook to public so mom could finally see it.

Sure enough it only took about 10 minutes from the time of the change for my mom to not only "like" it but to "heart" it. This time she went over-and-above and also wrote a note too.

I love my mom!

 

For the syndicated portfolio, you might want to take a peek at the PressForward plugin for WordPress [http://pressforward.org/]. While it is a stand-alone feed reader under the hood and could be used for creating an editorial flow, it will let you use a simple bookmarklet on your work published on another site to make a quick and complete copy of the post on your own site. Within the plugin settings you can set a "time to forward" (I use one second) such that people who visit that particular post will be automatically forwarded to the original (and canonical URL) on the commissioning outlet's site.

As an example, compare:
http://boffosocko.com/2017/06/09/%F0%9F%94%96-feed-reader-revolution-its-time-to-embrace-open-disrupt-social-media/ (which is a bookmark with some commentary pointing to my post)
to
http://boffosocko.com/2017/06/09/how-feed-readers-can-grow-market-share-and-take-over-social-media/ (which is an exact copy of my post, which only I can see on my backend, that redirects the viewer to the original on AltPlatform).

This is beneficial as you can syndicate (POSSE) the post with your own URL to Facebook, Twitter, et al. and folks who click to read will be sent to your site for a moment before being forwarded on to the original. Thus you get a ping and the original outlet also gets a ping (as well as the advertising revenue for it.) And if, for any reason, the original outlet goes out of business, gets sold, or disappears, you've got a word-for-word copy of your original and can simply un-forward it so that it can appear on your site as it was originally published. Naturally if you prefer and the outlet doesn't stipulate otherwise, you could publish the original to your site and not forward it (or even forward it for an exclusivity window of time pre-agreed with the original publisher.)

Additionally, if you're using Brid.gy for backfeed, anyone who comments on your POSSE copies will have their commentary sent to your site. While others won't necessarily be able to see the commentary (if you're forwarding the URL to the publisher's original), at least you'll be aware of it and can reply to it and get your own replies in return. I suspect that in the future brid.gy may be able to scrape commentary based on the syndicated URL so that your personal version aggregates commentary from the publisher's original as well as mentions of it on Facebook, Twitter, et al.

There are still some missing pieces I'd like to see in such a workflow for journalists, but it's slowly and surely getting somewhere.

(I've written about other parts of PressForward before at http://boffosocko.com/2016/12/31/pressforward-as-an-indieweb-wordpress-based-rss-feed-reader-pocketinstapaper-replacement/ as I also have an off-label use-case to replace read it later apps like Pocket and InstaPaper.)

 

Virtual Homebrew Website Club Meetup | July 12, 2017

Join some like-minded people in building and updating your personal website.

Location: Online: Google Hangouts (link TBA)

Time:

Ends:

•Work on your IndieWeb Resolutions for 2017
•Finish that blog post you’ve been working on
•Demos of recent IndieWeb breakthroughs
•Share what you’ve gotten working
•Ask the experts questions

Join a community with like-minded interests. Bring friends that want a personal site.

Any questions? Ask in chat: http://indiewebcamp.com/irc/today#bottom

Google Hangout: https://hangouts.google.com/hangouts/_/nu3zwcimzbhxrmlxv343yq2zsme

Optional quiet writing hour starts at 16:30 (Pacific)

Add your RSVP in the comments below, by adding your indie RSVP via webmention to this post, or by RSVPing yes to one of the posts below:
Indieweb.org event: https://indieweb.org/events/2017-07-12-homebrew-website-club#Virtual_Americas
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/events/237991833381531

The IndieWeb is a growing people-focused alternative to the ‘corporate web’.

Skill levels: Beginner, Intermediate, Advanced
, , , , ,

 

Replied to a post on github.com :

I'll check to see if it's the case with altplatforms' bug, but I've discovered that it's having Jetpack's commenting feature "Let readers use WordPress.com, Twitter, Facebook, or Google+ accounts to comment" activated that prevents the Webmention Form from appearing on the page. If I deactivate it, it not only appears properly, but shows up twice with the standalone plugin installed.

Incidentally it also causes issues on my 2016 theme where if one types too much in the enclosed field, the UI moves down and it becomes impossible to actually post the comment!

While I'm thinking about it, as an Indieweb-forward thought, would it be possible to put the Webmention Form at the top of the comment section instead of underneath it? While I'm (and I'm sure most of us are) receptive to comments in general, it would be nice to encourage others to own theirs at the top and then provide the default comment form underneath it. Just a thought...

I'll do some additional testing and report the bug to JetPack shortly.

 

Replied to a post on github.com :

I've read that it was something they tested out last year in select markets around Mother's Day. It's possible that it was brought back today again for Mother's Day on a limited basis.

https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/13/15635974/mothers-day-thankful-facebook-camera-flower-reaction-instagram

https://www.facebook.com/help/community/question/?id=10207656192377271

 

Replied to a post on github.com :

Interestingly these "loves" (and I suspect other reactions) from Facebook aren't parsed as webmentions (I'm guessing by semantic linkbacks plugin) as the comment_type in wp_comments is empty rather than "webmention", but they are assigned a semantic_linkbacks_type of "reply". I suspect that this is why they're not categorized in the webmention section. I'm not sure what the bug is for giving all the names the same URL....

 

Even Facebook has a (well-hidden) toggle to allow you to see "Most recent" posts (an unadulterated feed??) instead of "Top Stories" (the algorithmic feed). Sadly one has to know it's there and painfully and consciously choose it, which I'm sure very few do.