Travel back in time and see if you would have your response would be any differe...

0xbadcafebee · on Aug 8, 2013

I can't travel back in time. Left the TARDIS in a different century again.

Linus announcing his kernel was in a time when there were no open Unix-like operating systems to use. The GNU kernel was years away from release, but all the tools were there to make an operating system out of the tools, if there were just a free kernel too. (The only other kernels available were not available to the general public for free) It took years for a somewhat usable component to appear to look like a product once packaged correctly.

There exist open alternatives to galleries and video players, which is what this effectively is. That's not to say that in years this couldn't be a usable alternative to YouTube, but it's currently not being developed as a product. Instead it's apparently a high school class project. If they want people to use this, it needs some kind of vision other than yet-another-open-source-clone-we-don't-need-itis.

belorn · on Aug 8, 2013

The project is not about being a gallery and video player. We already got those as you say.

Rather, the projects scope is to create a federated gallery and video player, where each installed instance is connected with each other.

That has so far not been reached yet, which is why this software hasn't reached their 1.0 goal yet.

0xbadcafebee · on Aug 10, 2013

How does "federation" benefit anyone? Is it something you can explain to a layman that they will say "wow, I want that!" Is it even a problem people are even asking to be solved via products?

It's also curious if this was the whole point of the project, why wasn't that done first?

belorn · on Aug 10, 2013

> How does "federation" benefit anyone.

Improved Privacy. Only the author will have information regarding who visit, how many times, and for how long is-

Future proofing. Youtube and flickr will only exist as long those services are profitable. People who thinks they own their media, can only hope that it will stay online for as long as possible.

Improved API/features. Media hosting companies will limit features to match their business model. With federated services, there is no such limit.

Secure API. Media hosting companies will remove features if competitors are using the API in a threatening style. with federated services, there is no central company that can feel threatened.

> why wasn't that done first?

Just being federal, but with no meaningful usages, it would not be useful. I don't know if there is a technical reason why it couldn't be done at the same time.

dman · on Aug 8, 2013

Often ideas only sound great in retrospect.