@dansup maybe. Yet I use it. Not to indicate the online space that fedizens span up, but the suite of protocols that allow that. I recently started to make distinction between fedi and Fediverse as well, btw.
@smallcircles@dansup The irony of talking about a suite of protocols is that it has nothing to do with the web. The web is HTML content, usually limited to a web browser (it's in the name). So those using literally anything else isn't the web. HTML can be rendered elsewhere, but it's pretty rare. The web is more or less owned by Apple and Google. Mostly just Google. So I'm not a fan of the term. It limits things to the corporately owned web browser, and ignores command lines, native mobile apps, hardware devices, literally anything else. The internet is more than the world wide web.
Yes, in a way. Technical perspective though, where our fight is.
When one asks anyone about web and internet, they know exactly what it is and without the direct association of the Big Tech molochs.
I've said befor that Fediverse - with continued rise in popularity and adoption - will become just as ubiquitous as Web and Internet. A category name mostly, to conceptually delineate part of our shared online space.
As for Social Web. My quest is to "Reimagine Social".
Most people when hearing "Web" conceptually think of the huge intricately cross-linked body of information that is accessible via the internet. And in this meaning "Internet" is a synonym ("You can find it on the internet").
I've no problem with that.
Where I do take big issue is where Big Tech hijacks a common name as a brand name, and then growth-hack that to become the dominant meaning.
Add comment