I feel like all the sites and services that help make the fedi better should be organized under the Social Web Foundation but in such a way that they could be rebuilt/replicated if somehow the SWF version crashed or went evil.

And, there are many ways to address this. For instance, my implementation limits who has the ability to send encrypted messages. That’s how I was able to disable E2EE on my servers in the meantime. So in theory, advance could only allow encrypted messages from people they know and trust.

@Profpatsch @julian @ariadne

One option: you don’t. Private messages are private, and you just leave the conversation or block someone you don’t want to talk to. Signal does this.

There’s also a proposal to share messages HASHES with admins. They don’t see the content, but can verify the plaintext if it’s reported by recipients. Facebook does this (I think)

@Profpatsch @julian @ariadne

This is a valid concern that I’m pushing to be considered. Fortunately, the server implementation is pretty simple (as you’d hope for E2EE)

We’re leaning on C2S, betting client apps will interop with servers.

Also, my client is built in layers, hoping it can be a common core that many could build on and extend.

@Profpatsch @julian @ariadne

The official folks also recorded it but that might be awhile.

So short answer yes!

cc @ozoned@btfree.social

A lovely, large, moustache!

A pretty apt metaphor, actually.

(He was looking for bagpipes, by the way.)

Here's a collection of sites helping you choose an instance. <img class="not-responsive emoji" src="https://activitypub.space/assets/plugins/nodebb-plugin-emoji/emoji/android/1f631.png?v=513019a8bfd" title="" />