Recent searches
Search options
@Hamishcampbell@campaign.openworlds.info
Did ask directly cause this was also discussed in the W3C mailing list and a lot of people asked in the official forum and fedi already (probably in fediforum and socialhub too), in particular due to 1 sentence.
But I think it would be strange if my gov. asked some years ago and now it would turn out those projects are not applicable.
This would then be the same like prototype fund who even did not support all the ActivityPub applications …
@krakenbuerger
Could you answer public about this?
Maybe also about “bundling projects”?
Thank you so much.
@Hamishcampbell@campaign.openworlds.info
/me thinking privately :)
if those projects would not be applicable, the whole fund would fail and my gov. would just repeat the same fail like with Putins gas again.
A while ago it really seemed superclear to me that they _did_ understood that we have to prevent the next monopoly (also here) and it seemed clear to me that the gov. understood that we need an ActivityPub Client Ecosystem which is as _diverse_ as possible …
This _would_ without a doubt include such prosocial projects of all kinds. Currently we seem to be on a tipping point.