Slashdot Mirror


Open-Source Social Network Diaspora Goes Live

CWmike writes "Diaspora, a widely anticipated social network site built on open-source code, has cracked open its doors for business, at least for a handful of invited participants. 'Every week, we'll invite more people,' stated the developers behind the project, in a blog item posted Tuesday announcing the alpha release of the service. 'By taking these baby steps, we'll be able to quickly identify performance problems and iterate on features as quickly as possible.' Such a cautious rollout may be necessary, given how fresh the code is. In September, when the first version of the working code behind the service was posted, it was promptly criticized for being riddled with security errors. While Facebook creator Mark Zuckerberg may not be worried about Diaspora quite yet, the service is one of a growing number of efforts to build out open-source-based social-networking software and services."

12 of 266 comments (clear)

  1. Re:diaspora... by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yeah except for the fact that it offers nothing that the average user of Facebook wants or cares about.

  2. Re:Doubt it by gman003 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sure there is. Who's always the first adopters for open-source anti-corporatist programs? Nerds like us. Firefox started as the nerd's browser. Linux started as the nerd's OS - and it still is, on the desktop. So, for now, think of it as "Facebook for Slashdotters".

  3. Re:$SUBJECT by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Security is a design philosophy. Either you've done it right, from the ground up, with your basic code writing habits, or you haven't. A redesign isn't going to cut it. You'd have to do a total rewrite.

  4. Re:diaspora... by Musically_ut · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yeah except for the fact that it offers nothing that the average user of Facebook wants or cares about.

    Looking at it another way, perhaps it does not do what the average user of Facebook does not want.

    Apart from privacy issues, one of the problems I see with Facebook is the bloat (or crud) factor. Diaspora does not have that, at least not now.
    I have my fingers crossed.

    --
    Never trust a spiritual leader who cannot dance -- Mr. Miyagi
  5. Bloody idiots by GF678 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just had this pointed out to me:

    * Goto http://www.joindiaspora.com/ using Internet Explorer

    Instead of showing the page, what do you get? I'll tell you... a blank page with the following title:

    You need to use a real browser in order to use Diaspora!

    I'm not a IE fan, but this happens with Internet Explorer 8 for goodness sakes. Probably happens with IE9 too. FFS stop showing your fanboyish nature guys; you're basically stating that a good portion of users who only use IE, even if they're using a modern version of it with modern security features like sand-boxing and whatnot, is apparently not "real" enough for your fucking site.

    This really does piss me off. Makes the rest of us "open" FOSS users look like a pack of childish geeks who have no idea. You want your little social site to work? Don't arbitrarily restrict browsers!

    1. Re:Bloody idiots by GF678 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Your point about limiting browser support at this stage is perfectly reasonable, I agree 100%. But you also appear to agree that sidelining IE browsers in the manner they're doing is rather immature. If they blocked IE and explained why they were doing so without sounding pretentious, then it will look a lot more professional.

  6. Re:Doubt it by vrmlguy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There may be no incentive to join Diaspora, but I think that today could still mark a turning point. It provides a set of APIs that can be used to federate social networks. Facebook may not be interested in joining, but smaller networks will have a strong incentive to join. It could be like email thirty years ago. Back then there were lots of proprietary email systems that didn't interconnect. SMTP provided a common interconnection and eventually even the largest providers had to join. If one of the other major social networks, such as LinkedIn, MySpace or Orkut, were to federate with Diaspora, it would start a chain reaction. The only question would be if Facebook is already big enough to ignore a combination of all of its competitors. I'm betting that it's not.

    --
    Nothing for 6-digit uids?
  7. Whats Really Important by ADRA · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm a little late to the discussion, but I'll throw in anyways.

    The really important facet of what a Facebook alternative should look like is the ability to dis-intermediate the service from me and my use of the data that is collected about me. Facebook has barely supported an export feature, but removing my data from what is essentially a social connection tool to others is not a plan.

    Example:
    I own my cell phone, but I can choose to move myself, my data, (and in most places my phone number) to a different carrier. That means that the separation of the carrier in itself doesn't break my ability to communicate with friends or family through a mobile device. As it stands with social networks, if you're all on the same network, you can talk to one another. If you decide A and my sister decides B then there's no communication flow, and the ability to interact comes to an end.

    The ability to make an alternative Facebook is important in the ability to further control what I do with my own data, the ability to use my entered data outside of some company's pervue, and to have a service that I can easily add, interact with people and not feel like I'm tied to something I don't like. Facebook is a closed ecosystem. They consume content and lock it up from prying eyes. If Diaspora has or will have support for open inter-operating service offerings then great, otherwise they're just building another Facebook wanna be to take over the world. Who cares if Diaspora's code is Open Source if my interaction with the system and my data is shackled behind a single company's vision of how social networking should work?

    --
    Bye!
  8. Re:Security Vulnerabilities Discovered != Bad Thin by Americano · · Score: 5, Insightful

    These aren't "bugs," these are "gaping holes in security and privacy controls that don't appear to even have been considered."

    There's a difference between "our security system will behave badly when somebody presents it with a specially crafted URL, leading to unauthorized escalation of privileges" (a bug) and "our security system assumes that anybody accessing URL automatically has access to update, modify, delete, etc. anything at that URL." (a gaping hole in security, and a glaring *design* flaw).

    Unless you define "bug" to be such a broad category that it includes "incomplete, poorly thought-out rubbish," you cannot call some of these issues "bugs" in the software.

  9. Re:Doubt it by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Facebook's selling point was its exclusivity [...] There's no incentive to join Diaspora.

    You've contradicted yourself. Exclusivity is exactly what Diaspora will have. And it's not Facebook, your grandmother uses Facebook. Mainstream, pedestrian. For people who think Farmville is cool.

    FB is screaming out for an "exclusive" alternative. It's way overdue for the "omg are you still using lamebook?" effect.

    --
    Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
  10. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  11. Re:Security Vulnerabilities Discovered != Bad Thin by MtHuurne · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If they learned from their mistakes and adopted safer coding practices and added infrastructure that enforces proper security on the code then the review has paid off. On the other hand, if they only fixed the security bugs that were pointed out and continued coding the way they did before then it will never be secure since there won't be enough reviewers to keep up with all the new bugs being added.

    Yes, things would have been worse if this source was not open, but that doesn't necessarily mean the code is good enough now.