@kensanata @feonixrift @dredmorbius Well, I'd distinguish FOAF as a network strategy from FOAF as a communications strategy. FOAF for networking is, I hope, more likely to be a scale-tolerant and resilient system. But I've also had abysmal experiences of FOAF comms.. Retroshare, for example: once you hit FOAF connectivity sufficient for global routing.. there's this one guy who spams all the fora with antisemitist screeds. And anonymous, censorship-resistant FOAF networks can't deal with that. 🤷
This is why I think we need a toy network - a sandbox of completely simulated 'nodes' and 'links' and 'posts', purely statistical, not involving real servers just simulations - on which to try these things out! Then we would be able to work from at least simulated data when hashing out which methods might work, rather than pure imagination.
@cathal Reputational accountability for introductions and recommendations _is_ something that I think should scale _somewhat_ better than raw content-recommendations cases. Though given the disasters (and susceptibility to manipulation) of the latter, we may want to dial up the skepticism fully.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!