Administered by:
My thesis on P4P is finally online!
https://doi.org/10.17613/naj7d-6g984
P4P: Steps Toward more Adaptive Internets: charting Open-Source, P2P and Local-First Networks
@zelf finally got around to reading it in full, very nice! Can confirm it’s very legible even to a non-academic 
@erlend whoo! Happy to hear! Feeling honored 
@zelf >This study explores the development and implementation of Peer-for-Peer (P4P) networks, a family of open-source, peer-to-peer, and local-first communication protocols. Rooted in the principles of complexity theory and an ontological basis in complex realism, the research examines how small, modular, and community-driven infrastructures can serve as adaptive solutions in response to ecological, social, and technological crises. Through a mixed-methods approach, including interviews with nine case studies and an in-person workshop, the study identifies design principles that enable resilience and sustainability in P4P ecosystems. Findings highlight the critical role of modularity—both technical and social—in fostering self-organization, adaptability, and mutual aid within decentralized networks. The study also introduces the concept of "nested isomorphism," revealing how the structural patterns of technical systems influence the organizational structures that develop them. P4P protocols, such as Willow, Mapeo, and Scuttlebutt, demonstrate the viability of localized and distributed communication infrastructures that prioritize user agency and digital sovereignty. These systems challenge the colonial structures of global internet infrastructure by empowering communities to build and maintain their own resilient networks. This research contributes to complexity theory by expanding the understanding of self-organizing systems and isomorphic tendencies of technical and organizational structures. The research presents a framework for designing future communication infrastructures that align with principles of sustainability and inclusivity. The implications of these findings extend to the fields of open-source development, decentralized networks, and adaptive infrastructure design, offering pathways toward a more equitable and resilient digital future.
Well shit! That sounds really interesting!
@aspensmonster thank you! 
@zelf sounds marvelous. I’m gonna try to make my way through it (we’re using Willow in #weirdone after all) but 90 pages of academic text is admittedly a bit intimidating to me, although what I skimmed so far was quite legible to me 
Just to check, I don’t suppose there’s like a ~10 page version of this in the works for laypeople?
@erlend oh yes! Thank you for reminding me, was planning on making a zine out of it. I'll get on that too.
Great to hear you're using Willow! Their approach to protocol design inspired a lot of the conclusions in the thesis as well ~
Checked out #weirdone last night, will try it out for sure!
Edit: ps, I skimmed the documentation and got the impression you were running over ipfs, did you switch or running a merge somehow? *research curiosity intensifies*
@zelf hmm no, what docs did you derive ipfs from? Oh, the fact that I did a talk at the ipfs conf I guess.
Weird was never based on ipfs, but it has been prototyped using a close cousin, Iroh:
https://blog.muni.town/weird-happenings/
That’s what led us to Willow, which is now a core part of our architecture, whereas Iroh is being relegated to a more optional net-protocol for p2p connectivity.
@erlend ohhhh it makes sense now! It was last night and i think i just made the association. But that's great to hear! Met the iroh peeps for the first time last year. Love what they're doing too! Making p4p accessible 
Thanks for sharing the links, will save for future reference
@zelf thanks so much for sharing! nice work. 
@zelf downloading the pdf seems to fail? Or is it just a very special pdf format that my viewers fail to open? Others succeed in downloading and displaying the thesis?
@andrew_chou @hpk hmmmm that's odd :o it worked for me and for my dad when he tried. I know it looks kind of funky in the pdf web-viewer.
Here's a download link, will work for 1 week from now:
https://limewire.com/d/4ed6c751-457b-4d15-9e2c-2ffd98aa18dd#nbaGZYzj9tro82sIW8fIDCNN5c0Da3FFCHegwGCcFOg
@zelf @andrew_chou this worked. Going to print and read it. Congrats on finishing and publishing!
@hpk @andrew_chou awh, thank you 
@zelf worked, thank you and congrats! 
@andrew_chou thank you Andrew 
@zelf @andrew_chou @hpk omg limewire 
Fwiw I was able to download and read it from the original link
thank you very much @smallcircles much appreciated words of kindness. Adoring your flowing expression in general, very utopian maze
@smallcircles @zelf I had a mixed impression of the term. Before any context I thought ‘uh-oh, do we have a case of web5 type branding here?, but as soon as I read that it stands for peer *for* peer it made complete sense and I like it, heh.
Indeed. I find it very well relates both to technical and social concepts. People standing up for each other. Where they co-create and together shape the works that advance humanity there's peer production.
Social dynamics in grassroots creative environments (at 'movement' level) depend a lot on hedonic motives driving proactive participation of autonomous agents/peers. Intrinsic motivation drives 'governance' as emergent force through P4P commons-based service & value exchange.
I have named the overall 'formula' that incorporates such ideas "Joyful creation". Indicating a vision for seamless collaboration across the commons.
Also relating to "Joy of coding", but broadened to holistically include the entire scope of the creation process plus the full lifecycle of the created work, from first idea to dispersal of the value that was 'converged'.
I took inspiration of Dan North's @tastapod concept of #JoyfulCoding outlined at https://cupid.dev
Joy of coding is a big hedonic driver that starts many FOSS hobby projects. The problem is that these grow beyond hobbies and start to crack down quickly under the unaddressed forces that begin to work on them.
So here holistic approaches become vital. Accounting for evolution, adopting a sustainability-first approach to growth, relate local scope --> ecosystem --> movement.
As you know I 'ditched' FOSS as useful concept unless in handwavy casual chatter, and use a redefinition that is workable for a sustainable commons:
FOSS = SOSS + hobby projects
SOSS = Sustainable open social software
SOSS = Projects addressing their FSDL
FSDL = Free software development lifecycle
SOSS = Foundation of open social stack
Friendly and open ecosystems that may flourish and thrive can stand on SOSS, not on shaky hobby projects that may crumble any moment.
@smallcircles @erlend @tastapod exactly! This is what one of the conclusions in my thesis was about. What design principles can be made for sustainable FOSS (or rather SOSS ;D) projects to thrive? How should organizing be done?
- Small (like two people can complete it)
- Specific (has a limited and scoped function)
- Achievable (completed and no need for continuous expensive maintenance)
- Documented (other people can learn about it)
- Modular (can fit in with other projects, act as a bridge or connector)
All the above enable self-organizing, which is a resilient and adaptive formula for peer-for-peer as an ecosystem.
Edit: formatting
I would like to mention another imho crucial aspect. I have taken commonplace ideas of working-in-public to heart and created a variant called weaving-in-public. A very unselfish way, as you don't build a public influence sphere (influencer-style social networking):
https://discuss.coding.social/t/weaving-in-public-connecting-people-and-interests/85
Working in public is only a good practice. Insufficient. For healthy evolving commons we need working-in-commons, so we keep control and ownership "of the people, by the people".
I have been in discussions with quite a few FOSS working-in-public extremists who wanted to take the concept to its maximum extent, like operating with *complete* transparency (as a core requirement for trust), and plead e.g. for "radically transparent strategies".
That's playing poker with open cards and wondering why you always lose.
It is not a basis to live up to the dreams and ambitions to one day compete with big tech and brighter futures. It's flawed thinking.
What @zelf indicates is that there are many different contexts to take into consideration, and the context dictates the best approach. At a very fundamental basis the social context determines the meaning of information. You can have it stored in some kind of data model. I.e. data. But information and semantics make things as nuanced as you can manage and support it. How much of that we can do with tech, who knows. The social is still mostly all manual activity.
Btw we have various related subjects being discussed in social coding movement channels, subsequently in the Social experience design and Groundwork labs matrix chatrooms:
https://matrix.to/#/#socialcoding-foundations:matrix.org
https://matrix.to/#/#groundwork-matters:matrix.org
And reflections on these themes are welcome on the movement's discourse forum:
The website https://coding.social is informative, yet outdated. Should get a revamp in due time :)
This comment in the #SX channel directly relates to more observation re:social context:
@zelf finally something to read over the weekend.
@zelf just got patchwork again and its still working #scuttlebutt forever ;)
@stereo awwwhhh that's beautiful to hear getting Hermie nostalgia