cross-posted from: https://feddit.de/post/5064944
Let’s say a site like the New York Times supports ActivityPub, so you can comment e.g. from Mastodon on an article but also from the article’s page on nytimes.com, where all comments are displayed.
Is this article/nytimes.com part of the Fediverse? Yes and no. It should be but if we speak about the Fediverse we mostly mean social networks like Mastodon and Lemmy.
I think the reality is and will be slightly more complicated. I think we should think of the Fediverse as being a part of the web, be it a traditional website or a social network. That’s why I propose a new term: the fungal web, based on how mushrooms act as a dezentral connector over which plants communicate.
Don’t go into marketing for a living.
I don’t know, marketeers are always trying to sell you something as new that already exists.
Fungal like Fungal Infections? I dont think thats a great term.
no like fun gals doing fun stuff
C’mon! The Jock Itch network! The Athlete’s Foot network! The ad copy just writes itself!
I’m making a new burger restaurant, I’m thinking of calling it “The Bloody Hook” based off of the hook they bleed the cows on before they become our hamburgers, what do you think?
I’m not sure you want to associate this with things like candida infections.
Is this article/nytimes.com part of the Fediverse? Yes
FTFY. Problem solved.
if we speak about the Fediverse we mostly mean social networks like Mastodon and Lemmy.
I don’t know who this “we” is but I don’t. The Wikipedia article has a couple of good diagrams showing what most people consider to be the Fediverse - sure it includes the big dogs like Lemmy and Mastodon but it includes Wordpress and Diaspora (still need to dig out my old Diaspora account).
I don’t know. It’s an interconnected network or web. Maybe internet might work. We could call them websites.
deleted by creator
