00:00:24 RRSAgent has joined #social 00:00:24 logging to https://www.w3.org/2017/11/07-social-irc 00:00:26 RRSAgent, make logs public 00:00:26 Zakim has joined #social 00:00:26 tantek has changed the topic to: SocialCG f2f https://www.w3.org/wiki/SocialCG/2017-11-06, logs: https://chat.indieweb.org/social 00:00:28 Meeting: Social Web Working Group Teleconference 00:00:28 Date: 07 November 2017 00:00:36 scribenick: npdoty 00:00:37 present+ 00:00:45 present+ 00:00:51 present+ 00:01:06 zakim, agenda? 00:01:07 I see nothing on the agenda 00:01:17 agenda+ transition to CG 00:02:15 annbass has joined #social 00:02:29 agenda+ abuse and harassment 00:02:34 present+ annbass 00:03:21 Zakim, take up agendum 1 00:03:21 agendum 1. "transition to CG" taken up [from npdoty] 00:03:34 tantek: the WG will close at the end of the year, not many more teleconferences 00:03:45 ... no furhter f2f meetings scheduled 00:04:44 ... need to transition any ongoing work items that may last beyond the end of the year: errata/revised recommendations, extensions (already in CG to some extent), 00:05:13 ... CG scope is broader, so work that was out-of-scope for WG could be raised here 00:05:38 cwebber2: already in CG: implementation discussion 00:06:08 ... handle new extensions of vocabulary 00:06:31 ... wiki page has staged extensions, that can be voted into more official status 00:06:58 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Activity_Streams_extensions 00:07:15 ... `sensitive` flag for Mastodon, and Hashtag object type 00:09:54 tantek: normative AS2 sets a vocabulary; open-ended vocabulary model of Linked Data; microformats vocabulary documented in wiki pages 00:10:15 present+ hadleybeeman 00:10:27 https://www.w3.org/TR/social-web-protocols/ 00:10:28 [Amy Guy] Social Web Protocols 00:11:06 "Social Web Protocols" should terminate as a Note prior to closing the WG 00:11:26 hadleybeeman has joined #social 00:12:14 but "Social Web Protocols" doc could be maintained or updated as a report (or whatever to be called), by CG 00:12:31 (personally, I thought it was a useful overview) 00:13:22 snarfed: Granary has a test suite with informal mappings 00:13:24 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Activity_Streams/Microformats_Mapping 00:13:58 snarfed has joined #social 00:14:20 https://github.com/snarfed/granary converts between most social data formats - microformats2, AS1 and 2, Atom, etc. 00:14:21 [snarfed] granary: Fetches and converts data between Facebook, Google+, Instagram, and Twitter native APIs, ActivityStreams, microformats2 HTML and JSON, Atom, and more. 00:14:32 cwebber2: the extensions and a conversation point for implementations already part of the CG 00:14:42 ... not sure what new standards would be in this space 00:14:42 demo: https://granary-demo.appspot.com/ 00:14:56 tantek: work in progress, like Vouch for WebMention 00:15:49 present+ hadleybeeman 00:16:00 cwebber2: a community-run anti-spam service called @@@ 00:16:47 present+ snarfed 00:16:59 (snarfed = Ryan Barrett) 00:19:39 tantek: could start with a list of documents in progress that could be CG reports 00:19:48 documents from https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/ 00:19:49 ... do we want to continue the Social Web Protocols document, for example? 00:19:49 Weekly telecons take place on Tuesdays at 13:00 US/Eastern (10:00 US/Pacific, 19:00 Paris, etc), as determined by WG resolution on 2017-05-2... 00:19:54 * listed on 00:20:14 tantek: contributors can see what the current deliverables are that they might be able to work on 00:21:22 npdoty: CG can still be a place for general discussion on implementation and problems, but also have specific document deliverables 00:21:46 annbass: besides maintaining and errata, do any of the existing documents have big gaps that need to be flushed out? 00:22:51 tantek: for each spec, there were issues that were postponed for later versions 00:22:54 https://github.com/swicg/general/issues 00:24:28 hadleybeeman: "enthusiastic spectator" -- is this group only in existence for the end of the WG? or is it a separately useful lighter touch entity? 00:24:48 present+ torgo 00:25:35 cwebber2: major issues to address: harassment, account migration between servers 00:26:59 ... still significant work to do, but maybe enough of a concrete output for a dedicated WG 00:27:02 tantek: +1 00:27:24 annbass: move to a CG, see where the energy is for which work, and then see if there's a new WG needed 00:28:21 tantek: combining related smaller groups that are all Social but were specific to a single tech 00:29:24 hadleybeeman: relation to Mastodon? 00:29:53 cwebber2: yes, Mastodon is a large implementation of ActivityPub 00:30:30 [discussion of support and maintenance of StatusNet, GNUSocial, etc.] 00:31:02 tantek has joined #social 00:33:02 snarfed: some projects might not have technical energy to switch to ActivityPub 00:34:06 annbass: CG could attract participation from non-members, including Mastodon developers 00:35:29 rowan has joined #social 00:36:35 snarfed: fed.bridgy will bridge OStatus and ActivityPub 00:37:21 [@hadleybeeman] @agriculios They're growing out of the @SocialWebWG, which is winding up the to-do list in its charter: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg (http://twtr.io/1Y3FuGePhrm) 00:45:41 [discussion of using dedicated instances for companies and using Mastodon for support/engagement] 00:46:08 note: https://social.csswg.org/ 00:46:28 and https://w3c.social/ 00:46:31 federation allows anyone to set up any instance, but there is also a culture of the existing audience/community 00:49:33 [is Gargron actually Satoshi Nakomoto?] 00:52:45 https://github.com/swicg/general/issues/19 00:52:46 [cwebber] #19 ActivityStreams extensions process 00:54:10 npdoty: running separate Mastodon instances, or maintaining slightly different forks, might contribute to interop of ActivityPub, not just Mastodon versions 00:55:19 tantek: companies that start their own projects that use the protocols, would make it a peer in the system 00:56:32 Zakim, take up agendum 2 00:56:32 agendum 2. "abuse and harassment" taken up [from npdoty] 00:57:44 https://www.w3.org/wiki/SocialCG/2017-10-11/minutes 00:58:50 cwebber2: different approaches, including: federation of blocklists 00:59:26 shared blocklists on Twitter have had difficulties, including opening up further attack 01:00:14 cwebber2: filtering tools (based on specified words), or spam (bayesian inference) techniques 01:00:56 rowan has joined #social 01:01:19 cwebber2: or Web-of-Trust-style building a network of who you trust and their subsequent relationships 01:02:20 hadleybeeman: use cases for what can a victim do, but also interested in community responses / collective action 01:02:45 ... what about law enforcement or someone-who-wants-to-help or an authority, and how could they establish evidence, etc. 01:03:40 distinguishing between wide-scale surveillance and user features that could help with collaborating with authorities 01:05:29 to be clear, I'm not advocating surveillance or any kind of back door here. I'm talking about a different kind of user, who can pull data on (or be asked to help with) a situation where someone may need help. 01:05:45 Since there isn't a central authority to work out that one user is harrassing a bunch of people — how do a group of us gather evidence to for an offline authority to help/take action? 01:05:54 npdoty: an intrinsic advantage of federation is having different policies for different instances, rather than a single central system that has to have a single policy for everyone 01:06:37 @npdoty: Agreed. I'm more thinking of tools rather than policies 01:12:56 FYI: citations debunking more than not the notion of filter bubbles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filter_bubble#Reactions 01:14:58 npdoty: having more granular tools would make bubbles created by very blunt instruments even less likely to be a problem 01:15:18 cwebber2: try to prototype a lot of different filtering and blocking approaches, and see how well they actually work out 01:15:26 hadleybeeman: +1 01:15:43 ... will require regular adaptation/evolution over time 01:16:29 ... having granularity available, can make it so that superusers can develop different approaches that various users can try out 01:17:20 cwebber2: should try to push more power to the user rather than server or global level 01:17:54 [@agriculios] @hadleybeeman @SocialWebWG Thank you 😊 very, very interesting. (http://twtr.io/1Y3KYvke9SQ) 01:18:56 cwebber2: keeps me up at night that anyone can send something to your ActivityPub inbox 01:19:04 tantek: as it was with SMTP 01:21:38 HTTP 409 Payment Required 01:26:05 tantek has joined #social 01:26:31 tantek: don't have as much experience with as many users as large social networks and handling abuse in those situations 01:27:02 ... and can certainly have protocol designers that are blind to the privileges in place, as in W3C and IETF 01:28:18 torgo: there is a community of users who are especially familiar with abuse 01:28:25 cwebber2: and we can build on that 01:29:41 [discussion of Vouch and "web of trust" used in different ways] 01:30:17 torgo FYI: https://indieweb.org/Vouch 01:30:47 timbl has joined #social 01:36:08 group interest in dedicating some time to documenting cases and building methods for addressing harassment 01:37:04 https://www.w3.org/community/socialcg/ 01:37:50 trackbot, end meeting 01:37:50 Zakim, list attendees 01:37:50 As of this point the attendees have been tantek, cwebber, npdoty, annbass, hadleybeeman, snarfed, torgo 01:37:58 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 01:37:58 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2017/11/07-social-minutes.html trackbot 01:37:59 RRSAgent, bye 01:37:59 I see no action items