nixCraft, 1 month ago to linux

How To Use tar Command Through Network Over SSH Session https://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/howto-use-tar-command-through-network-over-ssh-session/ #linux #unix #opensource #tips #tricks

mikedev, 1 month ago to random

Here is what we've created:

Conversations: communicate directly with the people in the conversation, not have completely isolated conversations with your followers and their followers shouting at each other -- and neither audience seeing the responses of the others.

Permissions: If you haven't been given permission to speak, you aren't part of the conversation. If you have not been granted permission to view a photo or video, you won't see it.

Audience: Your choices go far beyond public and not public. Yes, we have groups. We also have circles. You can also just select a dozen people right now and have a conversation only with them.

Nomadic identity, amalgamated identities and single sign-on: Site and project/product boundaries don't exist. It's one big space and you are you - no matter what service or services you use.

Post limits, photo limits, poll limits: None.

Rich content: Use markdown, bbcode, or HTML. Any of them or all of them.

Rules: You make them.

Algorithms: You can install them if you want. You can remove them. You control them and can tweak them.

And much more.

We are the streams repository.

https://codeberg.org/streams/streams

ScienceDesk, 1 month ago to science

There is something seriously wrong with our understanding of the universe. Scientists using the James Webb and Hubble space telescopes have triple-checked and confirmed that depending on where we look, the universe is expanding at bafflingly different rates. Live Science explains more, including how scientists are ruling out a measurement error as the cause of the “Hubble Tension.” https://flip.it/VDvM6g
#Science #Space #Hubble #HubbleTension #Universe #JWST

tallship, 1 month ago to foss

Thanks Evan, there's a bit to digest there, some of which I agree with, and some of which I don't, between what both you and the Other Evan had to offer.

It's good to get this stuff right out in the open, especially as the Fediverse is currently undergoing yet another paradigmatic shifts, perhaps an evolutionary step, but certainly, a complete game changer from much of the perspective offered in the Evan <==> Evan Essays ;)

https://fediversity.site/item/eed57428-ca9c-4ea1-a398-ef2d7319eff7

I hope that helps! Enjoy!

#tallship #FOSS #Fediverse #masto_Tron_is_Gone #ActivityPub #Streams #Identity

RE: https://evanp.me/2024/04/14/responses-to-rabble-on-activitypub/

@evanprodromou

tallship, 1 month ago to fediverse

Okay I thought I'd share this recent post here on the #Fediverse. To give it some context, it's an answer to a common question, often a misunderstanding (even by many knowledgeable folks) as to just how we got here.

So first, the question, posed HERE.

And my answer follows below:

There's a lot of apples and oranges here. And everyone had a lot of good points made, but your question is simple, and has a very simple answer. I'll endeavor to address that directly, but do need to tend to some of what has already been said.

Scroll down to the tl;dr for the succinct answer of your question

Ethernet, ARCNET, Token Ring, Thick net (RG-59), Thin net (RG-58 A/U), and UTP (Cat 3, Cat 5, and Cat 6 unshielded twisted pair, Etc.) really have zero bearing on your question insofar as IP is concerned. All of these specifications relate to the definition of technologies that, although are indeed addressed in the OSI model which is indeed very much in use to this day,but are outside the scope of Internet Protocol. I'll come back to this in a minute.

It's quite common to say TCP/IP, but really, it's just IP. For example, we have TCP ports and we have UDP ports in firewalling. i.e., TCP is Transmission Control Protocol and handles the delivery of data in the form of packets. IP handles the routing itself so those messages can arrive to and from the end points. Uniform Data Protocol is another delivery system that does not guarantee arrival but operates on a best effort basis, while TCP is much chattier as it guarantees delivery and retransmission of missed packets - UDP is pretty efficient but in the case of say, a phone call, a packet here and there won't be missed by the human ear.

That's a very simplistic high level-view that will only stand up to the most basic of scrutiny, but this isn't a class on internetworking ;) If you just want to be able to understand conceptually, my definition will suffice.

Networking (LAN) topologies like Token Ring, ARCNET, and Ethernet aren't anywhere in the IP stack, but figure prominently in the OSI stack. I'm not going to go into the details of how these work, or the physical connection methods used like Vampire Taps, Thin net, or twisted pair with RJ-45 terminators, but their relationship will become obvious in a moment.

The OSI model unfolds like so, remember this little mnemonic to keep it straight so you always know:

> People Don't Need To See Paula Abdul

Okay, touched on already, but not really treated, is the description of that little memory aid.

> Physical, Data Link, Network, Transport, Session, Presentation, and Application layers (From bottom to top).

The physical and Data Link layers cover things like the cabling methods described above,and you're probably familiar with MAC Addresses (medium access control) on NICs (network interface controller). These correlate to the first two layers of the OSI stack, namely, the Physical (obvious - you can touch it), and the Data Link layer - how each host's NIC and switches on each LAN segment talk to each other and decide which packets are designated for whom (People Don't).

In software engineering, we're concerned mostly with the Session, Presentation, and Application layers (See Paula Abdul). Detailed explanation of these top three layers is outside the scope of this discussion.

The Beauty of the OSI model is that each layer on one host (or program) talks to exclusively with the same layer of the program or hardware on the other host it is communicating with - or so it believes it is, because, as should be obvious, is has to pass its information down the stack to the next layer below itself, and then when it arrives at the other host, it passes that information back up the stack until it reaches the very top (Abdul) of the stack - the application.

Not all communication involves all of the stacks. At the LAN (Local Area Network) level, we're mostly concerned with the Physical and Data Link layers - we're just trying to get some packet that we aren't concerned about the contents of from one box to another. But that packet probably includes information that goes all the way up the stack.

For instance, NIC #1 has the MAC: 00:b0:d0:63:c2:26 and NIC #2 has a MAC of 00:00:5e:c0:53:af. There's communication between these two NICs over the Ethernet on this LAN segment. One says I have a packet for 00:00:5e:c0:53:af and then two answers and says, "Hey that's me!" Nobody else has that address on the LAN, so they don't answer and stop listening for the payload.

Now for Internet Protocol (IP) and TCP/UDP (Transmission Control Protocol and User Datagram Protocol):

IP corresponds to Layer 3 (Need) - the Network Layer of the **OSI Model.

TCP and UDP correspond to Layer 4 (To) - the Transport Layer of the OSI model.

That covers the entire OSI model and how TCP/IP correspond to it - almost. You're not getting off that easy today.

There's actually a bit of conflation and overlapping there. Just like in real life, it's never that cut and dried. For that, we have the following excellent explanation and drill down thanks to Julia Evans:

• Layer 2 (Don't) corresponds to Ethernet.
• Layer 3 (Need) corresponds to IP.
• Layer 4 (To) corresponds to TCP or UDP (or ICMP etc)
• Layer 7 (Abdul) corresponds to whatever is inside the TCP or UDP packet (for example a DNS query)

You may wish to give her page a gander for just a bit more of a deeper dive.

Now let's talk about what might be a bit of a misconception on the part of some, or at least, a bit of a foggy conflation between that of the specification of the OSI model and a Company called Bolt Beranek & Newman (BBN) a government contractor tasked with developing the IP stack networking code.

The TCP/IP you know and depend upon today wasn't written by them, and to suggest that it was the OSI model that was scrapped instead of BBN's product is a bit of a misunderstanding. As you can see from above, the OSI model is very much alive and well, and factors into your everyday life, encompasses software development and communications, device manufacturing and engineering, as well as routing and delivery of information.

This next part is rather opinionated, and the way that many of us choose to remember our history of UNIX, the ARPANET, the NSFnet, and the Internet:

The IP stack you know and use everyday was fathered by Bill Joy, who arrived at UC Berkeley in (IIRC) 1974), created vi because ed just wasn't cutting it when he wanted a full screen editor to write Berkeley UNIX (BSD), including TCP/IP, and co-founded Sun Microsystems (SunOS / Solaris):

> Bill Joy just didn’t feel like this (the BBN code) was as efficient as he could do if he did it himself. And so Joy just rewrote it. Here the stuff was delivered to him, he said, “That’s a bunch of junk,” and he redid it. There was no debate at all. He just unilaterally redid it.

Because UNIX was hitherto an AT&T product, and because government contracting has always been rife with interminable vacillating and pontificating, BBN never actually managed to produce code for the the IP stack that could really be relied upon. In short, it kinda sucked. Bad.

I highly recommend that you take a look at this excellent resource explaining the OSI model.

tl;dr:

So! You've decided to scroll down and skip all of the other stuff to get the straight dope on the answer to your question. Here it is:

> What were the major things that caused TCP/IP to become the internet standard protocol?

The ARPANET (and where I worked, what was to become specifically the MILNET portion of that) had a mandate to replace NCP (Network Control Protocol) with IP (Internet Protocol). We did a dry run and literally over two thirds of the Internet (ARPANET) at that time disappeared, because people are lazy, software has bugs, you name it. There were lots of reasons. But that only lasted the better part of a day for the most part.

At that time the ARPANET really only consisted of Universities, big Defense contractors and U.S. Military facilities. Now, if you'll do a bit of digging around, you'll discover that there was really no such thing as NCP - that is, for the most part, what the film industry refers to as a retcon, meaning that we, as an industry, retroactively went back and came up with a way to explain away replacing a protocol that didn't really exist - a backstory, if you will. Sure, there was NCP, it was mostly a kludge of heterogeneous management and communications programs that varied from system to system, site to site, with several commonalities and inconsistencies that were hobbled together with bailing twine, coat hangers, and duct tape (for lack of a better metaphor).

So we really, really, needed something as uniform and ubiquitous as the promise that Internet Protocol would deliver. Because Bill Joy and others had done so much work at UC Berkeley, we actually had 4.1BSD (4.1a) to work with on our DEC machinery. As a junior member of my division, in both age and experience, I was given the task of, let's say throwing the switch on some of our machines, so to speak, when we cut over from the NCP spaghetti and henceforth embraced TCP/IP no matter what, on Flag Day - 01 January 1983.

So you see,the adoption of Internet Protocol was not a de facto occurrence - it was de jure, a government mandate to occur at a specific time on a specific day.

It literally had nothing to do with popularity or some kind of organic adoption, the erroneously described, so-called demise of the OSI model, or any physical network topology.

DARPA said 01 January 1983 and that's it, and that was it - Flag Day.

Sure, it took a few days for several facilities to come up (anyone not running IP was summarily and unceremoniously cut off from the ARPANET).

And one also needs to consider that it wasn't every machine - we only had some machines that were Internet hosts. We still had a lot of mainframes and mini computers, etc., that were interconnected within our facilities in a hodgepodge or some other fashion. Nowadays we have a tendency to be somewhat incredulous if every device doesn't directly connect over IP to the Internet in some way. That wasn't the case back then - you passed traffic internally, sometimes by unmounting tapes from one machine and mounting them on another.

There was a lot of hand wringing, stress, boatloads of frustration, and concern by people over keeping their jobs all over the world. But that's why and when it happened. Six months later in the UNIX portions of networks we had much greater stability with the release of 4.2BSD, but it wouldn't really be until a few years later Net2 was released that things settled down with the virtually flawless networking stability that we enjoy today.

Enjoy!

#tallship #DARPA #IP #Internet_Protocol #Computer_History #internetworking #Internet #ARPANET #MILNET #NSFnet #Bill_Joy #BBN #UNIX #BSD

⛵

.

tallship, 1 month ago to fediverse

The question posed was:

What were the major things that caused TCP/IP to become the internet standard protocol?

This had to be addressed, with so many people piling on and choosing that the OSI model was replaced by TCP/IP because it worked better and increased in popularity

Nothing could be further from the truth.

https://public.mitra.social/users/tallshiptallship wrote the following post Sat, 13 Apr 2024 17:34:29 +0000

DARPA Logo Defense Advanced Projects Administration
Okay I thought I'd share this recent post here on the #Fediverse. To give it some context, it's an answer to a common question, often a misunderstanding (even by many knowledgeable folks) as to just how we got here.

So first, the question, posed HERE.

And my answer follows below:

There's a lot of apples and oranges here. And everyone had a lot of good points made, but your question is simple, and has a very simple answer. I'll endeavor to address that directly, but do need to tend to some of what has already been said.

Scroll down to the tl;dr for the succinct answer of your question

Ethernet, ARCNET, Token Ring, Thick net (RG-59), Thin net (RG-58 A/U), and UTP (Cat 3, Cat 5, and Cat 6 unshielded twisted pair, Etc.) really have zero bearing on your question insofar as IP is concerned. All of these specifications relate to the definition of technologies that, although are indeed addressed in the OSI model which is indeed very much in use to this day,but are outside the scope of Internet Protocol. I'll come back to this in a minute.

It's quite common to say TCP/IP, but really, it's just IP. For example, we have TCP ports and we have UDP ports in firewalling. i.e., TCP is Transmission Control Protocol and handles the delivery of data in the form of packets. IP handles the routing itself so those messages can arrive to and from the end points. Uniform Data Protocol is another delivery system that does not guarantee arrival but operates on a best effort basis, while TCP is much chattier as it guarantees delivery and retransmission of missed packets - UDP is pretty efficient but in the case of say, a phone call, a packet here and there won't be missed by the human ear.

That's a very simplistic high level-view that will only stand up to the most basic of scrutiny, but this isn't a class on internetworking ;) If you just want to be able to understand conceptually, my definition will suffice.

Networking (LAN) topologies like Token Ring, ARCNET, and Ethernet aren't anywhere in the IP stack, but figure prominently in the OSI stack. I'm not going to go into the details of how these work, or the physical connection methods used like Vampire Taps, Thin net, or twisted pair with RJ-45 terminators, but their relationship will become obvious in a moment.

The OSI model unfolds like so, remember this little mnemonic to keep it straight so you always know:

> People Don't Need To See Paula Abdul

Okay, touched on already, but not really treated, is the description of that little memory aid.

> Physical, Data Link, Network, Transport, Session, Presentation, and Application layers (From bottom to top).

The physical and Data Link layers cover things like the cabling methods described above,and you're probably familiar with MAC Addresses (medium access control) on NICs (network interface controller). These correlate to the first two layers of the OSI stack, namely, the Physical (obvious - you can touch it), and the Data Link layer - how each host's NIC and switches on each LAN segment talk to each other and decide which packets are designated for whom (People Don't).

In software engineering, we're concerned mostly with the Session, Presentation, and Application layers (See Paula Abdul). Detailed explanation of these top three layers is outside the scope of this discussion.

The Beauty of the OSI model is that each layer on one host (or program) talks to exclusively with the same layer of the program or hardware on the other host it is communicating with - or so it believes it is, because, as should be obvious, is has to pass its information down the stack to the next layer below itself, and then when it arrives at the other host, it passes that information back up the stack until it reaches the very top (Abdul) of the stack - the application.

Not all communication involves all of the stacks. At the LAN (Local Area Network) level, we're mostly concerned with the Physical and Data Link layers - we're just trying to get some packet that we aren't concerned about the contents of from one box to another. But that packet probably includes information that goes all the way up the stack.

For instance, NIC #1 has the MAC: 00:b0:d0:63:c2:26 and NIC #2 has a MAC of 00:00:5e:c0:53:af. There's communication between these two NICs over the Ethernet on this LAN segment. One says I have a packet for 00:00:5e:c0:53:af and then two answers and says, "Hey that's me!" Nobody else has that address on the LAN, so they don't answer and stop listening for the payload.

Now for Internet Protocol (IP) and TCP/UDP (Transmission Control Protocol and User Datagram Protocol):

IP corresponds to Layer 3 (Need) - the Network Layer of the **OSI Model.

TCP and UDP correspond to Layer 4 (To) - the Transport Layer of the OSI model.

That covers the entire OSI model and how TCP/IP correspond to it - almost. You're not getting off that easy today.

There's actually a bit of conflation and overlapping there. Just like in real life, it's never that cut and dried. For that, we have the following excellent explanation and drill down thanks to Julia Evans:

• Layer 2 (Don't) corresponds to Ethernet.
• Layer 3 (Need) corresponds to IP.
• Layer 4 (To) corresponds to TCP or UDP (or ICMP etc)
• Layer 7 (Abdul) corresponds to whatever is inside the TCP or UDP packet (for example a DNS query)

You may wish to give her page a gander for just a bit more of a deeper dive.

Now let's talk about what might be a bit of a misconception on the part of some, or at least, a bit of a foggy conflation between that of the specification of the OSI model and a Company called Bolt Beranek & Newman (BBN) a government contractor tasked with developing the IP stack networking code.

The TCP/IP you know and depend upon today wasn't written by them, and to suggest that it was the OSI model that was scrapped instead of BBN's product is a bit of a misunderstanding. As you can see from above, the OSI model is very much alive and well, and factors into your everyday life, encompasses software development and communications, device manufacturing and engineering, as well as routing and delivery of information.

This next part is rather opinionated, and the way that many of us choose to remember our history of UNIX, the ARPANET, the NSFnet, and the Internet:

The IP stack you know and use everyday was fathered by Bill Joy, who arrived at UC Berkeley in (IIRC) 1974), created vi because ed just wasn't cutting it when he wanted a full screen editor to write Berkeley UNIX (BSD), including TCP/IP, and co-founded Sun Microsystems (SunOS / Solaris):

> Bill Joy just didn’t feel like this (the BBN code) was as efficient as he could do if he did it himself. And so Joy just rewrote it. Here the stuff was delivered to him, he said, “That’s a bunch of junk,” and he redid it. There was no debate at all. He just unilaterally redid it.

Because UNIX was hitherto an AT&T product, and because government contracting has always been rife with interminable vacillating and pontificating, BBN never actually managed to produce code for the the IP stack that could really be relied upon. In short, it kinda sucked. Bad.

I highly recommend that you take a look at this excellent resource explaining the OSI model.

tl;dr:

So! You've decided to scroll down and skip all of the other stuff to get the straight dope on the answer to your question. Here it is:

> What were the major things that caused TCP/IP to become the internet standard protocol?

The ARPANET (and where I worked, what was to become specifically the MILNET portion of that) had a mandate to replace NCP (Network Control Protocol) with IP (Internet Protocol). We did a dry run and literally over two thirds of the Internet (ARPANET) at that time disappeared, because people are lazy, software has bugs, you name it. There were lots of reasons. But that only lasted the better part of a day for the most part.

At that time the ARPANET really only consisted of Universities, big Defense contractors and U.S. Military facilities. Now, if you'll do a bit of digging around, you'll discover that there was really no such thing as NCP - that is, for the most part, what the film industry refers to as a retcon, meaning that we, as an industry, retroactively went back and came up with a way to explain away replacing a protocol that didn't really exist - a backstory, if you will. Sure, there was NCP, it was mostly a kludge of heterogeneous management and communications programs that varied from system to system, site to site, with several commonalities and inconsistencies that were hobbled together with bailing twine, coat hangers, and duct tape (for lack of a better metaphor).

So we really, really, needed something as uniform and ubiquitous as the promise that Internet Protocol would deliver. Because Bill Joy and others had done so much work at UC Berkeley, we actually had 4.1BSD (4.1a) to work with on our DEC machinery. As a junior member of my division, in both age and experience, I was given the task of, let's say throwing the switch on some of our machines, so to speak, when we cut over from the NCP spaghetti and henceforth embraced TCP/IP no matter what, on Flag Day - 01 January 1983.

So you see,the adoption of Internet Protocol was not a de facto occurrence - it was de jure, a government mandate to occur at a specific time on a specific day.

It literally had nothing to do with popularity or some kind of organic adoption, the erroneously described, so-called demise of the OSI model, or any physical network topology.

DARPA said 01 January 1983 and that's it, and that was it - Flag Day.

Sure, it took a few days for several facilities to come up (anyone not running IP was summarily and unceremoniously cut off from the ARPANET).

And one also needs to consider that it wasn't every machine - we only had some machines that were Internet hosts. We still had a lot of mainframes and mini computers, etc., that were interconnected within our facilities in a hodgepodge or some other fashion. Nowadays we have a tendency to be somewhat incredulous if every device doesn't directly connect over IP to the Internet in some way. That wasn't the case back then - you passed traffic internally, sometimes by unmounting tapes from one machine and mounting them on another.

There was a lot of hand wringing, stress, boatloads of frustration, and concern by people over keeping their jobs all over the world. But that's why and when it happened. Six months later in the UNIX portions of networks we had much greater stability with the release of 4.2BSD, but it wouldn't really be until a few years later Net2 was released that things settled down with the virtually flawless networking stability that we enjoy today.

Enjoy!

#tallship #DARPA #IP #Internet_Protocol #Computer_History #internetworking #Internet #ARPANET #MILNET #NSFnet #Bill_Joy #BBN #UNIX #BSD

⛵

.

lminiero, 1 month ago to random

20 years after the first themes came to me, I finally did it... My 27 minutes rock opera song on Cleopatra is now done! It's an appetizer to my upcoming "Musae" album, where it will be one of the tracks: in this EP I decided to split it in different parts for easier listening.

Bandcamp: https://lminiero.bandcamp.com/album/cleopatra
Mirlo: https://mirlo.space/lminiero/release/cleopatra-(ep)
Faircamp: https://music.lminiero.it/cleopatra/

Will soon be on Spotify/Apple Music/iTunes/etc. too.

I'd love to hear what you think, boosts welcome!

#FairTradeMusic

snikket_im, 1 month ago to android

Just a heads-up that #Snikket #Android has been pulled by #Google from the store. We'll work on restoring it once we figure out their (as usual) nonsensical complaints. Apologies to everyone affected. Please look at #FDroid and free yourself.

Today's excuse for delisting yet another #XMPP app?

"Your app is uploading users' Image information without posting a privacy policy link or text within the Play Distributed App."

Funny. What's this then?? 👀

erlend, 1 month ago to fediverse

https://blog.erlend.sh/evergreen-content-gardens

Social bookmarking is a novel use case for #ActivityPub and I’m super excited about it. I heckin’ love links and lists! I wanna use them for everything.

Things like #Bookwyrm are cool, but it’s not what I want. I just wanna link the thing. Books, films, podcasts, articles, songs.., they’re all just resource recommendations which can be encapsulated by links.

Thanks to @raffomania and @eb for the indirect prompts leading to this article mixing their ideas with my own.

mikedev, 1 month ago to random

Cool - I think this is the first time I've seen a fediverse event from software that I didn't write.

https://fediversity.site/photos/mikedev/image/0b86e104-d6a7-4d41-abc3-70dff06e8fff

dansup, 1 month ago to fediverse

https://pubkit.net is so close, can't wait to ship this service 🚀

#pubkit #activityPub #fediverse

youronlyone, 1 month ago to fediverse

One way to promote the #Fediverse is by making the different fediverse software support custom profile skins and themes. This can potentially create an ecosystem of skin and theme creators, which in turn will make more people talk about it.

I differentiate between a skin and a theme because:

• A “skin” is like changing the CSS of the default layout. Adding an image here and there, new icons, and colours and gradients.
• While a “theme” can change the layout itself. The widgets available, or shuffle them around. Possible even a way to add custom ones (careful with this though).

Remember the original #CMS in late 90s to 2010? #PHPnuke #PostNuke #Xaraya etc.?

You can add, remove, and move widgets around. Use custom ones easily. Change colours easily. Change the widths, the columns, and so on. That is a “theme”. There were even third-party frontend packages a developer can use so they don't have to worry much about it.

Skinning is the simplest method; and this was what made #Plurk popular when it launched in May 2008 (yes, Plurk is as old as the Fediverse network). There was a Plurk skin ecosystem, which in turn increased the number of people talking about Plurk.

Apply the theming feature from the early CMS brands with Plurk's user-level skinning feature, and we create a playground for the users.

#Misskey and forks already had a good start with their user-level skinning feature (and user-level plugins at that). We just need to see it in the other popular fediverse software.

Make it easier to understand. Write guidelines in layman's terms, not dev terms, and maybe, just maybe, we can spark the interest of new users. Who doesn't want a customisable user profile?

darnelltv, 1 month ago to random

Welcome to WordPress! This is your first post. Edit or delete it to take the first step in your blogging journey.

https://darnellclayton.com/2024/04/07/hello-world/

tallship, 1 month ago to random

July 18th, 2023

#SuperSunnySouthernCalifornia #palm_trees

#tallship

⛵

.

dansup, 1 month ago to random

I'm really looking forward to onboarding the first batch of Loops beta testers.

I'm aware of the massive hype and thousands of interested users!

This is why I'm working hard to ship the beta, with a suite of features that you'd expect, for example:

• Likes
• Follows
• Comments
• Push Notifications

I'm not going to make the same mistake I did with Sup and lose focus/work on other things.

I'm 100% focused on @loops for the time being.

Let's ship this beta 🚀

dansup, 1 month ago to random

Finishing up Profile Settings in @loops

Because we're launching the beta with a mobile-only client, I have to make sure you can manage all your settings via the app.

We do have plans for a web client, but for now #loops will be mobile only.

#loopsDev

tallship, 1 month ago to foss

@Teri_Kanefield

Hi Teri,

I'm writing you because I came across your blog site and thought you may be able to leverage the Fediverse in conjunction with your WordPress site's publishing horsepower.

As a #FOSS advocate with great enthusiasm for mass #Fediverse adoption, I'd like to suggest a couple of things for you to consider, and the following treatment can also benefit others who also have bridged over to the Fediverse that already have a WordPress installation, or have been looking to deploy one.

• First, that you think about establishing a Fediverse account other than that of a stock Mastodon instance. Sure, keep your @Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social account, just create another account for yourself on a platform that will afford you more options that can facilitate your creative freedom (let's not dissect that word, lolz) to publish posts that are in excess of a paltry 500 characters, along with things like Markup capabilities, Etc. Just a thought. ...

This leads into the next suggestion, ...

• Second, why not make that account your existing WordPress blog, where you already have a permanent, branded presence and readership? Let's supercharge your WordPress site by making it a full and complete publishing platform completely integrated with the Fediverse.

There's a couple of methodologies, but generally speaking, once you install the ActivityPub plugin any future blog posts are on the Fediverse as well as any other distribution channels you may already have (say, by virtue of having installed the JetPack Social plugin that propagates into the deprecated silo networks).

One method I can recommend is to follow this basic procedure to popularize your blog posts and gain followers - just like you probably have been with the mastodon.social account you already have:

1. ) If you've already created a new account on a more feature complete platform that's better suited for long form posting, inline images, Etc., like #Friendica, #Socialhome, any #Misskey or #Pleroma family fork platform, #Hubzilla, or #Mitra (They all have excellent Markdown support too); simply follow your #WordPress user account @<username>@terikanefield.com. If not, then simply follow your WordPress Fediverse user account from your existing masto account - which you should do anyway since I gather you have some respectable measure of followers.

2.) Everytime you publish a new news article / blog post on your WordPress site, you'll see it in your stream on your fediverse accounts.

3.) Boost each article from those accounts, your followers will see what you boost in their streams.

4.) encourage them to boost as well and/or comment - you'll see those comments in the reply section of each article on your WordPress site - Awesome!

5.) Now that you have followers of your WordPress user's Fediverse account you should be able to garner more direct interaction on your WordPress site, instead of having to post links to those posts from your mastodon.social account.

6. ) From your @<username>@terikanefield.com account at your WordPress site, you can now directly interact with your followers, even those who post replies/comments to your articles, whether or not they are a follower of yours.

I'm taking the time to write because I see that you have a relatively decent circulation and engagement between readers and your blog articles, and the more people that see you engaging with others in the Fediverse directly from your WordPress site, the more people are encouraged to Join the Fediverse.

I am, as stated in my profile and also leading in to this, a FOSS and Privacy Advocate.

So here's a couple of links, one to the plugin itself - it's easy to install and deploy. Another older one that's still relevant that shows you how to do the install, and I think that's about it. We'll see ;)

• WordPress ActivityPub Plugin - This is where you get the plugin
• HowTo with Video - Really simple, easy install, right from your WordPress admin panel
• JetPac Social - I'm definitely not a fan of this kind of engagement (with the privacy mining, deprecated, monolithic silo networks), but you do you - it can afford you with even greater reach through syndication, and if you write about the Fediverse, well, ... So much the better!
• You should also consider following the magnanimous @pfefferle - one of the primary authors of the #ActivityPub_Plugin.

I hope that helps! All the best!

#tallship

⛵

.

ajroach42, 1 month ago to random

I spent some time this morning talking about my finances, and doing some planning.

The upshot is that I'm in a mostly stable position by the middle of April, and that'll be enough to buy us three or four months, but I really need to have some additional income by July if we're going to hold on for the long run.

gancio, 1 month ago to random Italian

#gancio v1.15.1 released

• new moderation / report feature
• new editor role
• new language Albanian

full changelog: https://gancio.org/changelog#1151-2024-04-01

tallship, 1 month ago to random

Happy RFC 2334 day!

You're a fricken' Teapot!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyper_Text_Coffee_Pot_Control_Protocol

#tallship #RFC_2334 #HTTP_418

⛵

.

catodon, 1 month ago to random

Hello there! If you are on #Iceshrimp, #Firefish or #Sharkey, there's a new security patch out so your server admin should update the software immediately. #Catodon has also merged the patch from upstream #Iceshrimp and catodon.social has been updated ​:catodon:​

tallship, 1 month ago to random

Some pet stores need to get with the program. What do they mean, "no bunnies on Easter?"

This pet store claims that not enough bunnies are being BBQ'd and as a result they're ending up in animal shelters.

Well, because it takes both a bunny AND a chicken to make easter eggs, it looks like we're just gonna have to work around the no bunny part this year.

This is how that works :p

#tallship #Easter_Eggs #Easter_Bunnies #Easter_Chicken

⛵

.

RT: https://ohai.social/users/MeanwhileinCanada/statuses/112185047451493799

tallship, 1 month ago to random

Go Tommy, it's your birthday, Go Tommy, it's your birthday, Go Tommy, Go Tommy

#tallship #Tommy_Wiseau #Best_Fiends - F(r)iends @TommyWiseau You can haz #Cheezburgerz! 🍔

⛵

.

RE: https://mastodon.social/users/TommyWiseau/statuses/102890475029012257

@TommyWiseau

forsaken, 6 months ago to random

What do you think the future of XMPP will be like? I think it might be the protocol I enjoy using the most