although this is unlikely to substantially and directly impact us and is a more immediate concern for Mastodon and similar fediverse software, we’ve signed the Anti-Meta Fedi Pact as a matter of principle. that pact pledges the following:
i am an instance admin/mod on the fediverse. by signing this pact, i hereby agree to block any instances owned by meta should they pop up on the fediverse. project92 is a real and serious threat to the health and longevity of fedi and must be fought back against at every possible opportunity
the maintainer of the site is currently a little busy and seems to manually add signatures so we may not appear on there for several days but here’s a quick receipt that we did indeed sign it.
Twitter’s project? You mean Jack Dorsey’s BlueSky? It doesn’t do ActivityPub - it’s not part of the fediverse
It is federated, but I forgot it wasn’t activitypub.
It’s decentralised and open-source, but not federated, as it works on its own isolated protocol (similar to Matrix)
Matrix is also federated… having your own protocol is not related to the concept of federation, which is simply the property of having the ability to run your own servers and join a network of other servers which share a protocol.
Yes ,and no.
It depends on how you define both terms. If decentralised = federated, matrix is federated. But if federation is defined as a model of social network in which different servers based on different platforms interact through the use of the same protocol(S) (decentralisation + interoperability), being isolated, Matrix doesn’t fit the definition.
Because Matrix doesn’t accept other platforms to enter its protocol, nor plans on adding it’s commonly not considered to be truly federated
Matrix does. There’s multiple different projects that implement Matrix’s protocols: https://matrix.org/ecosystem/servers/
Those are still Matrix (platform) style servers.
You don’t have something like Mastodon vs Pixelfed vs Lemmy in terms of diversity of products.