Diaspora (currently styled diaspora* and formerly styled DIASPORA*) is a nonprofit, user-owned, distributed social network that is based upon the free Diaspora software. Diaspora consists of a group of independently owned nodes (called pods) which interoperate to form the network. As of March 2014, there are more than 1 million Diaspora accounts.[1]
The social network is not owned by any one person or entity, keeping it from being subject to corporate take-overs or advertising. In September 2011 the developers stated, "...our distributed design means no big corporation will ever control Diaspora. Diaspora* will never sell your social life to advertisers, and you won’t have to conform to someone’s arbitrary rules or look over your shoulder before you speak."[2]
Diaspora software development is managed by the Diaspora Foundation, which is part of the Free Software Support Network (FSSN). The FSSN is in turn run by Eben Moglen and the Software Freedom Law Center. The FSSN acts as an umbrella organization to Diaspora development and manages Diaspora's branding, finances and legal assets.[3]
Whenever i bring up diaspora* those who i suspect are establishment shills go to great lengths to discourage its use. This could be reverse psychology, or an unintended endorsement.
It wasn't well designed. I followed it from its original release and, at the time, it used a crazy stack of Rails + Mongo + can't remember whatelse that no standard webhost had. I wanted to run a node, but it was before VPSes were affordable. The install instructions were complex and only for Debian/Ubuntu. No CentOS. No openSUSE.
I haven't looked at it in a while and I'm sure it's tons better now, but that earlier barrier to entry was a problem. They were just kids too and they ran into a lot of the issues that have moved devs away from Mongo for primary data storage (vs just a cache).
I've become a big believer in the idea that there are shills against this type of thing.
You can imagine how many corporate/government interests there are in having facebook be the predominant social network, and why something like diaspora would be met with hostility.
Another project I can think of that gets a lot of suspicious opposition is Project Ara, definitely check that out when you get a chance. That also can also be explained by upsetting corporate/government interests.
view the rest of the comments →
FriedFood100 ago
Diaspora (social network) https://diasporafoundation.org/
poly ago
Whenever i bring up diaspora* those who i suspect are establishment shills go to great lengths to discourage its use. This could be reverse psychology, or an unintended endorsement.
djsumdog ago
It wasn't well designed. I followed it from its original release and, at the time, it used a crazy stack of Rails + Mongo + can't remember whatelse that no standard webhost had. I wanted to run a node, but it was before VPSes were affordable. The install instructions were complex and only for Debian/Ubuntu. No CentOS. No openSUSE.
I haven't looked at it in a while and I'm sure it's tons better now, but that earlier barrier to entry was a problem. They were just kids too and they ran into a lot of the issues that have moved devs away from Mongo for primary data storage (vs just a cache).
Today, the federated social network landscape is pretty broken. Scroll up to see my other link. Or hell I'll just past it again: http://code.tutsplus.com/tutorials/revisiting-open-source-social-networking-alternatives--cms-22445
FriedFood100 ago
I've become a big believer in the idea that there are shills against this type of thing. You can imagine how many corporate/government interests there are in having facebook be the predominant social network, and why something like diaspora would be met with hostility.
Another project I can think of that gets a lot of suspicious opposition is Project Ara, definitely check that out when you get a chance. That also can also be explained by upsetting corporate/government interests.