> Neither, both. Freedom Box should be capable of being a > Diaspora node, and also be capable of being a DFRN server.
i think so, for example FreedomBox Foundation have the power to encourage XMPP networks use, make a distributed Search stack based on something like http://abmargb.blogspot.com/2011/06/pub-sub-search-engine-progress-report.html and ..profit! But it seems not fair for networks who don't use/like XMPP and not efficient for evolution of FSW generally, (let's name it, people on W3C doing a fair amount of work to sum-up and make a Web federated, as a "highest instance" of Internet - W3C, in the end, takes a responsibility on open and re-useful Web schemes to be widely used, given the p2p in browser initiative - supported by W3C for defending the same principals - FreedomBox Foundation is for (from what i'v heard) http://www.w3.org/2011/04/webrtc-charter.html http://wwwery.com/2011/05/06/p2p-on-browsers/ also - http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/REC-ccxml-20110705/ http://public.webfoundation.org/2011/01/MW4D_WS/report kind of work; i think - Foundation should work back-to-back with W3C at least in certain areas as browser based p2p is an easiest way to help the goals of Freedom even on systems that won't use GNU/Linux, FreedomBoxes could easily be a desirable hosters and trusties for these and other web apps as first of all - Proprietary Cloud is Apps Cloud) I think - what is particularly great in Debian project is diversity of distributives based on it, but - another particular strength of Debian at least with FreedomBox initiative - is an ideological emphasis on Freedom (including Privacy and Security) and defense of it. That introduces the path. but there are many ways (you know): - making a FreedomBox distributive for one social network protocol with one persistence model - another network another model - "dissident" mode dist - "provider" dist - "track me fully, i love you" mode dist - "i use only GNU" dist - "i want non-track-able AugmentedReality!" - Ultimate FreedomBox in bullet-proof environment. etc.etc. Approach of a "buy 4GFreedomBox for your garage" is good for someone. Plug-server (i hope not - under the bed) Approach of Construct; Install; Decide; is good for someone. Approach of pre-installed package is good.. Approach of FBox from Cloud... live-CD's/Live-Flash's/LiveHDD's/CloudOS's/Embedded all these have many potential users, i see, and many - may need a specific codebase. Another variant for people who would make a hardware Boxes that compatible with next level of Freedom needs: Portable FreedomBoxes > Wireless Boxes Portable + Wireless = Mobile FreedomBoxes! that one is particularly important as mobiles is where is the worst situation now. For a Packaging of FreedomBox i see 1. A viable variant in which every social network initiative and other biggest formed "groups of interest" providing a help for their own "dist", and core-base of dists are all provisioned by experienced GNU/Debian/FBX contributors. That dists - finally - would be used by people that have completed hardware/bandwidth requirements with their existing personal computer - instead of their normal Debian/Ubuntu's etc. These may be configured for a key-switch full-featured run while computer is "unused", elastic use of computing power and network power in other cases. In a few years, i think - computing power would be completely enough to run a pretty full-featured software Box in background, on every-day basis for Freedom believers, even on netbooks, tablets and mobiles. Particularly mobiles - that need a GNU/Linux anyway to be normal computers, not a closed boxes like they are now (i could elaborate widely - why either - Android and iOS aren't a nice decisions for FreedomBox goals, not mentioning HP and MS work, and why is so important - particularly for FBoxes to encourage a GNU/Linux for mobiles, but You, probably, know it already). So - making a dist which not only with Free soft but with pro-active Free soft would be useful. 2. Another variant is package for an usual GNU/Linux distributives. However some things like a speedy Tor requires decisions like in Tails so - just a package for existing Ubuntu wouldn't be enough and, given the possibly incompatible base-design patterns - FreedomBox Foundation should discuss with all major Debian-based dists (since the plan as i know - to use (exclusively?) - Debian base), so - Foundation would see if there a possibility to just make a ppa packages for such kind of use, encourage some changes (may not be so hard) if not.. >From what i see - better to use both approaches - for different or similar purposes. I propose - decide on Highly important offers - create a Voting system without auth an other and promote it everywhere so "mankind could decide" for me the most important Distributed Search stack (it could be great, finally - it could be possible!) and Distributed hosting (by that - distributed back-end for social and other soft systems, decoupling data from soft) that would be included in every possible FreedomBox - used with ID system (that would possibly need - to be one and best, however - it seems not real so - better - few and good) and give other abilities like - use this or that social network - for a distributives of choice, but authoritately push the Federation, ofc. ;) As said in many sources - a project need to have a strict position to have a face and force. so maybe - you - FreedomBox board - would - essentially - decide to XMPP or not, for example, but it would be much more interesting to create a Voting system where IT world if not every user(if you won't be able to make a very good poll) - would show their position - depending on country etc. by that - many things would be much more clear. PS: Excuse me for bloating the topic but i think - the protocol variety decisions are relative to dist and hardware packaging. _______________________________________________ Freedombox-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
