Comments on: FriendFeed, Facebook and the Insider Logroll http://www.evilgeniuschronicles.org/wordpress/2009/08/11/friendfeed-facebook-and-the-insider-logroll/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=friendfeed-facebook-and-the-insider-logroll A journal of geekery, music and joy Fri, 03 Feb 2012 23:04:56 -0500 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Ken Kennedy http://www.evilgeniuschronicles.org/wordpress/2009/08/11/friendfeed-facebook-and-the-insider-logroll/#comment-148325 Ken Kennedy Tue, 11 Aug 2009 14:41:54 +0000 http://www.evilgeniuschronicles.org/wordpress/2009/08/11/friendfeed-facebook-and-the-insider-logroll/#comment-148325 I'm slotted right in there with you, Dave. This comes out of the blue, and while I'm trying to have faith in at least some of the founders doing "the right thing" (Paul Buchheit in particular appears to want that, at least), I'm honestly pessimistic. But we're stuck relying on good faith. Stuck sharecropping. Again. *sigh* Serves me right, I suppose...in my explorations of a way forward, I'm pretty much bound and determined to stick to solutions that protect against this happening again. There appear to be 2 decent ways: 1) "legal"/explicitt assertion (ie, founder says, if I sell this thing, I'll make a copy/GPL the code/whatever) 2) architectural and technical design (decentralized and federated, and ideally already either open-sourced, or with F/OSS implementations available.) Ideally, both, though with #2, you're semi-protected from the requirement of #1. I’m slotted right in there with you, Dave. This comes out of the blue, and while I’m trying to have faith in at least some of the founders doing “the right thing” (Paul Buchheit in particular appears to want that, at least), I’m honestly pessimistic.

But we’re stuck relying on good faith. Stuck sharecropping. Again. *sigh* Serves me right, I suppose…in my explorations of a way forward, I’m pretty much bound and determined to stick to solutions that protect against this happening again.

There appear to be 2 decent ways:
1) “legal”/explicitt assertion (ie, founder says, if I sell this thing, I’ll make a copy/GPL the code/whatever)

2) architectural and technical design (decentralized and federated, and ideally already either open-sourced, or with F/OSS implementations available.)

Ideally, both, though with #2, you’re semi-protected from the requirement of #1.

]]>