An overdue update from the Diaspora team [LWN.net]

An overdue update from the Diaspora team

Posted Aug 27, 2010 15:36 UTC (Fri) by Trelane (subscriber, #56877) [Link]

(what's more, there's been a lot of money thrown at it and a lot of media attention lavished on it and yet their ratio of press release to code release is still infinity! I'd perhaps have thrown in a couple of bucks, but it just seems like a huge scam.)

An overdue update from the Diaspora team

Posted Aug 27, 2010 15:47 UTC (Fri) by MisterIO (guest, #36192) [Link]

Did you read the real post? The source code release is set for September 15. So we're gonna find out quite soon and I doubt a scam would set a realease date so close.

An overdue update from the Diaspora team

Posted Aug 27, 2010 15:58 UTC (Fri) by Trelane (subscriber, #56877) [Link]

I didn't say that it was a scam; I said that it "seems like" a scam. Especially back when the original (NYT?) story came out and they had their hand out for money. Seriously, it's great that they said September 15. I hope they stick to it. I have no problems being happy when the source is out. But until the source comes out, it's still, at best, vaporware. They can claim it is completely semantic web enabled and synergistic with all exiting desktop offerings; who can challenge their claims? (And they may even think they can achieve all of their stated goals and progress, and maybe they can. We simply have no hard data).

I doubt a scam would set a realease date so close.

Why not? Scammers will always have the money or product "any day now" or "by next week" but then something invariably happens. Some of the best roofing or disaster scammers I've heard about even start the job and then never come back after the first day. (And again, I'm not saying that it's a scam, just that it "seems like" one. Perhaps "feels like" would have been less ambiguously ambiguous. ;)

An overdue update from the Diaspora team

Posted Aug 27, 2010 18:52 UTC (Fri) by kragil (subscriber, #34373) [Link]

Conspiracy theorizing much?

I don't think scammers would pick a well respected company as their workplace and let employees pre-alpha test and help with the coding. So my guess is what you write is total FUD and BS.

An overdue update from the Diaspora team

Posted Aug 27, 2010 19:47 UTC (Fri) by Trelane (subscriber, #56877) [Link]

Conspiracy theorizing much?

Huh?

don't think scammers would pick a well respected company as their workplace and let employees pre-alpha test and help with the coding.

sigh

Perhaps I'm not being clear enough. Permit me to be as loud and direct as possible:

I DON'T (NECESSARILY) THINK THAT THIS IS A SCAM.

If I could put that in a frickin' <blink>ing <marquee>, I would. I understand that you saw the word "scam" and your knee had to jerk, but please pay attention to what I'm actually saying.

I did, however, note that it has some of the characteristics of a scam and pointed those characteristics out. I also pointed out that having an anticipated date when the goods are delivered doesn't make it not a scam; rather, that's a common scam tactic. Again with the bold, italicized yelling since some people still don't seem to get it, THIS DOESN'T MEANT THAT I THINK SOMETHING THAT IS PROMISED TO BE RELEASED IS A SCAM, LET ALONE *THIS* *PARTICULAR* THING.

I don't think scammers would pick a well respected company as their workplace and let employees pre-alpha test and help with the coding

I don't know pivotal labs, so I'll have to take your word for it. If completely accurate, it's a fair point that this may deliver on all that they promise.

So my guess is what you write is total FUD and BS.

So because you are convinced it's not a scam, "[everything?] that [I] write is total [sewing of Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt] and [bullshit]"? Seriously? Please look at the totality of what I said, not the not-claim that you're so up in arms about. Have they released it? No. Have they let anyone (aside from, apparently, select people at Pivotal) look at it? No. How is this not vaporware? That is my argument, plus a flavor of what others have said (the "ironic" comment below) regarding a Free project being developed behind closed doors. The "scam" comment was because that was my initial reaction back in April or so when it was announced in the NYT: basically, "A Free project being developed behind closed doors? Their ready availability to the media but complete lack of source or executable code, coupled with their hand out for donations? I really really hope this doesn't turn out to be a scam; that could look really bad for FOSS." So far, these characteristics have continued, so my feeling hasn't gone away. It's probably not a scam. But I have the feeling and it's not been assuaged.

NOW KINDLY STICK TO WHAT I'VE ACTUALLY SAID, NOT WHAT YOU'VE IMAGINED I'VE SAID.

An overdue update from the Diaspora team

Posted Aug 27, 2010 19:50 UTC (Fri) by Trelane (subscriber, #56877) [Link]

(in addition, you'll note that the "scam" bit was attached to the [reasons I wanted to throw in some money but didn't] section of the comment. Maybe you disagree. That's your right. I saw lots of press releases, asking for money, and zero code, so I balked at giving them money until they produced code. That was my reasoning, and so far it's not been countered. I can't afford much anyway, so it's not like my lack of donation has significantly hampered the project (it'd only have been 10 or 20 bucks), so I don't know why I'm getting jumped on all of a sudden.)

An overdue update from the Diaspora team

Posted Aug 27, 2010 20:23 UTC (Fri) by kragil (subscriber, #34373) [Link]

You said it seems like a huge scam, but it clearly doesn't. They presented their work at Mozilla, razorfish and pivotal and had people help with the coding/testing/design and showed videos of it running. So unless you are really negative for some strange reason (envy?) there are no grounds to suggest that this might be a scam or that they won't flip their github switch on 15th and make the repository public.

Sure it might have been wiser to work in the open, but I guess they had their reasons for not doing it.

An overdue update from the Diaspora team

Posted Aug 27, 2010 20:46 UTC (Fri) by Trelane (subscriber, #56877) [Link]

it clearly doesn't.

Perhaps to you, but not to me. Honest people can disagree, no? It was my reasoning for not donating and it remains so. Perhaps I should also start qualifying my words with "to me" to make this point clear too.

They presented their work at Mozilla razorfish and pivotal

Well, no, they gave a talk at Mozilla and Razorfish. (sources: https://wiki.mozilla.org/WeeklyUpdates/2010-08-16 http://swik.net/GNOME/Planet+GNOME/Luis+Villa%3A+Notes+on+Diaspora+Talk/ei4mj )

had people help with the coding/testing/design

Had a very few, selected people, sure. It's less likely to remain vaporware, but until it's publically released, it's still vaporware.

showed videos of it running

That means precisely jack, honestly. I saw videos of the WePad (http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/gadgets/0,1518,684853,00.html) too, but that doesn't meant that it's really going to happen or that they were real (they were apparently running XP on the WePad they demoed, and the "live demo" was actually a video)

So unless you are really negative for some strange reason

Really? Those are the only two options? Complete faith or I must be "really negative" for a "strange reason"? How simple your world must be!

I may well be overly paranoid, it is very true. However, I've not seen enough to convince me to give them money, which is the central question being addressed by this annoying subthread. Maybe you are convinced and gave them money. That's fine; it's your money, not mine. However, by the same token, it's my money not yours and so it's my decision and I stand by it.

I look forward to the day when I find out that my concerns have been for nothing, and they've delivered the source code to everything. It'll be great to have a Free-like-statusnet social networking site. We're not there, though.

(envy?)

Umm, way to jump to a very insulting conclusion. Please lay off the insults, hey? (and to address the charge: no, I'm not envious)

there are no grounds to suggest that this might be a scam or that they won't flip their github switch on 15th and make the repository public.

I have a decent amount of faith that they will deliver on some of their promises. I have less faith that they'll deliver on all of their promises. I do not, however, have sufficient faith to give them my money yet.

Sure it might have been wiser to work in the open, but I guess they had their reasons for not doing it.

Yes, I'd have been very happy to have seen this, and they'd have a few more bucks from me for it.

Note that you've not addressed the core point outside of "it smelled too much like a scam to me, so I didn't give them money", which remains sound: This is still vaporware.

An overdue update from the Diaspora team

Posted Sep 11, 2010 19:55 UTC (Sat) by Baylink (subscriber, #755) [Link]

And, as I noted in a comment at Kickstarter, the architecture they posit makes certain very useful functions which are already provided by services like Facebook *structurally impossible to provide* in the completely distributed environment they propose, as they require a trusted third party which -- at the time, at least -- their design did not appear to provide for.

It will be interesting to see if, and what, they ship.

Duke Nuken Forever

Posted Aug 28, 2010 1:59 UTC (Sat) by tialaramex (subscriber, #21167) [Link]

So, firstly, I don't happen to think it likely that this is any kind of scam. However I do expect it to be rather disappointing, I'll be pleasantly surprised if it achieves even the rather minimal impact of something like OpenID.

But it genuinely wouldn't be unusual to announce this date even if they were a scam, or had nothing.

Look at things like Steorn. Why say you're going to demo a perpetual motion machine? Obviously you won't, and then you'll have to make excuses. But that's exactly what Steorn did, they announced a public demo, then cancelled it. NB: Steorn didn't go bust, never did retract the claims, and continued to receive positive press.

Now whether it's actual dishonesty or just a surprising willingness to really believe nonsense you've made up, it genuinely does pay. Most profitable audio business? Peter Belt. Buy stationery supplies, tell the customer it is high end audio equipment. Or go into medicine. "RF sensitivity" is a psychiatric condition, but that won't stop you selling expensive shielding products. Still not making enough money? How about becoming a military supplier. Cheap plastic wand and some electrical components, and you've got yourself a $20 000 bomb detector. Works well in unblinded tests, just like any other stick.

More scams

Posted Aug 28, 2010 14:19 UTC (Sat) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link]

Thanks, I had a laugh with Steorn and Peter Belt after a couple of quick searches. Pity that the Randi challenge for audiophile cables does not have a good introductory page, or at least I did not find it.

An overdue update from the Diaspora team

Posted Aug 27, 2010 21:13 UTC (Fri) by asmiller-ke6seh (guest, #69824) [Link]

Um, vaporware? How about it's an Open Source project, and the initial developers wanted something exciting and interesting to do over the summer which would be great experience, and would really look good on their resumes (two of the developers are recent college graduates, and two are still in college).

I gave them $10 to help them get off the ground, partly because I thought what they where trying to do sounded neat, partly because I hate what Facebook does to completely ignore Internet security and privacy, and DIASPORA* sounded like a potential solution, partly because I believe in Open Source Everything and Everywhere, and partly because I could afford to throw $10 at all of this on the chance that it becomes something really cool and exciting ... and I could say I helped to get the ball rolling by being one of the early venture 'capitalists'** (and I would get a neat T-shirt, sticker, and letter to prove it).

----------------------
**capitalist is not the right word, because I am not expecting any return on my money. I am investing in an idea which I find pretty exciting.

An overdue update from the Diaspora team

Posted Aug 27, 2010 21:36 UTC (Fri) by Trelane (subscriber, #56877) [Link]

How about it's an Open Source project

It's not Open Source, as Open Source would require the Source to be, well, Open. It's not open; access to it is currently tightly closed. (I do, however, have high hopes that they'll deliver on their promise and that it will be Free Software (as they've previously stated), not just open source. Regardless, at this point in time, it's pretty clearly not open source software. And incidentally, the Software isn't Free either; it's Caged Software ;) )

It's also vaporware, because it's not been announced for a long time, but not released. Quoth Wikipedia:

Vaporware is a word used to describe products, usually computer hardware or software, that were not released on the date announced by their developer, or that were announced months or years before their release.

So yes, it's vaporware.

and the initial developers wanted something exciting and interesting to do over the summer which would be great experience, and would really look good on their resumes

That's fine, but has no bearing on whether or not it's vaporware.

Maybe I'm naive, but I don't see how this is not vaporware.

An overdue update from the Diaspora team

Posted Aug 27, 2010 22:52 UTC (Fri) by kragil (subscriber, #34373) [Link]

Vaporware is when you announce something and then don't release on the date you originally intended (the German Wikipedia article is more clear about that, Wikipedia can be wrong you know)
If the guys release on the 15th of September (as they always said) then Diaspora is/was no vaporware and so there reason to give them such a negative term. Three months is a totally reasonable time frame for such a software.

Your definition of vaporware would make all software that is not released on the day it is announced vaporware, that is just stupid.

An overdue update from the Diaspora team

Posted Aug 27, 2010 22:56 UTC (Fri) by kragil (subscriber, #34373) [Link]

*there is NO reason to

(Editor? It is 2010 .. when do we get an EDIT button?)

Edit button

Posted Aug 27, 2010 23:23 UTC (Fri) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link]

The lack of an edit button isn't a technical issue, it would be easy enough to provide. I left it out deliberately in the initial design of the site, and haven't yet been convinced that things should change.

I worry, you see, that following conversations will get harder if comments mutate over time. It's also not possible to call back emailed copies of comments or those which have been pulled into RSS readers. And, in general, I'd really rather that people make their edits before posting the comment; that's why the preview step is always forced.

Now, if LWN's readership really thinks that's a backward approach rooted in the dark days of 2002, we can change it. Perhaps the history of edited comments could be made available or something. I am not dead set on the status quo, but I would need to be convinced that it really needs to change.

Edit button

Posted Aug 27, 2010 23:29 UTC (Fri) by kragil (subscriber, #34373) [Link]

I don't want a permanent EDIT button. Just a x minutes(x=3 | X = 5) timeframe that makes editing typos possible. Emails could go out once the edit option is gone.
Other sites like Digg, OSnews and other use this and I find it to be a really good addition.

Edit button

Posted Aug 27, 2010 23:41 UTC (Fri) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link]

would you be willing to have the edit go away if someone clicks reply to your message?

I agree that it would be nice to be able to fix things, but I also don't like cases that I've seen where someone replies to something and then the something they are replying to changes to no longer include the portion that was being replied to. At best this is confusing, at worst this is misleading

Edit button

Posted Aug 28, 2010 1:59 UTC (Sat) by dmarti (subscriber, #11625) [Link]

The obvious solution is keep the baby-aspirin* orange stripe for comments that are old enough to be no longer editable, and green for the unripe ones.

Also, white bikeshed with green trim plz.

* don't actually give aspirin to a baby.

Edit button

Posted Aug 28, 2010 5:23 UTC (Sat) by TRS-80 (subscriber, #1804) [Link]

That approach is good, it (along with time-limited edits) is taken by many sites that allow editing.

Edit button

Posted Aug 28, 2010 11:35 UTC (Sat) by kragil (subscriber, #34373) [Link]

Sure, replies could/should also disable the edit function and send out emails right away.

Edit button

Posted Aug 28, 2010 18:25 UTC (Sat) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link]

Please do not use the time delay for edits. Conversations on LWN.net can be remarkably agile just because emails are fired right away; the original poster can start writing the response. Even a 3-minute delay adds up after 40+ posts (not unusual here).

Also, a 3 minute limit would impose a certain Mission Impossible eagerness on posters. I (for one) am sure that I would see typos precisely 2:40 after the initial post, would never be sure if edits are possible and would end up stressed with little to show for it. Just preview your message before pressing "Publish comment", instead of after! (And the gods will surely punish my hubris with a host of typpos on this verry mesage.)

OTOH an intelligent typo correction feature might be a worthy addition: maybe allow edition of up to two words per post, although that is not too intelligent.

Edit button

Posted Aug 28, 2010 21:12 UTC (Sat) by jordanb (guest, #45668) [Link]

"Agility" isn't always a good thing.

Look at the crap-fest in *this very article*.

Edit button

Posted Aug 28, 2010 21:15 UTC (Sat) by jordanb (guest, #45668) [Link]

I'm adding another comment because I thought of this after hitting submit:

There's little worth saying that can't wait five minutes. If the 'agility' of discussion happens because of rapid-fire email notices, then I think that agility is pretty much guaranteed to be of little value.

And if you *want* to get in a flame fest, why not just reload the page, or watch comments/unread? Why do you need an instant email? Lord knows people manage to have flame-fests on reddit that are almost as bad as the ones here.

Edit button

Posted Aug 29, 2010 0:45 UTC (Sun) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link]

You have a point there. Actually I was more concerned about my second issue, i.e. stressing out posters; and my third, i.e. that LWN.net should try to outdo flame-festing sites.

Edit button

Posted Aug 28, 2010 0:05 UTC (Sat) by cesarb (subscriber, #6266) [Link]

> a backward approach rooted in the dark days of 2002

The "backward approach rooted in the dark days of 2002" is one of the charms of this site. For instance, not many sites are as lightweight - as far as I have seen, this site can load a full page from a cold cache in very few kilobytes.

For instance, this page before posting this comment was only 35561 bytes. The favicon is 769 bytes. The logo is 13201 bytes. Not counting the ads, in around 50K the whole page loaded with all comments.

Edit button

Posted Aug 28, 2010 1:59 UTC (Sat) by jordanb (guest, #45668) [Link]

I think that might have been a valid concern back when you created the site, but the whole internet has moved towards editable posts and I think that it's better for it. Certainly other sites with editable posts demonstrate that the concerns you have are largely unfounded. Except for people (rightfully) deleting flames after they cool off, there isn't a great deal of after-the-fact post morphing.

Plus, I always have mistakes that I only notice after I hit 'submit.' Your preview window manages to cloak them somehow, ;) and I would rather be able to fix my typos and grammar errors than having an immutable record of the fact that I made them.

To be honest, I like the way reddit and hacker news do it: There's no preview. You type it out and hit 'submit,' then read it on the site and tweak it there.

If you're worried about emails, why not wait until after the edit window is gone before sending out the email?

Edit button

Posted Sep 2, 2010 7:42 UTC (Thu) by Felix.Braun (subscriber, #3032) [Link]

Our esteemed editor clairvoyantly makes us go through a Preview/Publish cycle for every comment. If that doesn't stop you from publishing things that you want to correct two minutes later, then maybe the solution is not adding an edit button to the site code, instead you might want to be more careful in your review the next time before you hit Publish.

An overdue update from the Diaspora team

Posted Aug 27, 2010 23:04 UTC (Fri) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link]

while I agree that vaporware has connotations that are a little strong here, I think the poster does have a valid point as well.

the fact that these folks aren't allowing the technical visibility into what they are doing could be that they are just too busy, heads down and working, except for the fact that they seem to have plenty of time to talk to the press.

I really do hope that this turns into a real opensource project, (and even better if it meets the stricter 'free software' criteria), but so far we have very little info, they may have made design choices that will cripple them that would not have been made if there was more visibility and discussion going on.

So far they are not complying with the 'release early, release often' standard that opensource software tries to achieve, they are new, but they got themselves a LOT of attention (and money, far more than they had asked for to get the job done), and so they will get correspondingly more attention as well.

An overdue update from the Diaspora team

Posted Aug 28, 2010 1:23 UTC (Sat) by Trelane (subscriber, #56877) [Link]

Vaporware is when you announce something and then don't release on the date you originally intended

Perhaps. It seems that we disagree on the definition. Merriam-Webster Dictionary any better for you?

: a computer-related product that has been widely advertised but has not and may never become available

How about Random House Dictionary and even The Jargon File?

a product, esp. software, that is promoted or marketed while it is still in development and that may never be produced.

and

Products announced far in advance of any release (which may or may not actually take place). The term came from Atari users and was later applied by Infoworld to Microsoft's continuous lying about Microsoft Windows. See also brochureware.

And finally, your source (since you didn't actually cite and quote it, you only paraphrased it

Als Vaporware wird eine Produktankündigung bezeichnet, deren Auslieferungsdatum mehrfach auf unbestimmte Zeit verschoben wurde oder bei der die Auslieferung des Produktes nicht zu Stande kam.

Vaprware describes a product whose delivery date is delayed numerous times an unspecified amount of time or which is not delivered on the promised date.

So, now we have numerous sources, conflicting and agreeing in various ways. :)

(the German Wikipedia article is more clear about that, Wikipedia can be wrong you know)

Klar, aber Wikipedia kann auch Unrecht haben. ;) Dazu kann "Wahr" und "Falsch" nicht die einzige Möglichkeiten sein.

An overdue update from the Diaspora team

Posted Aug 28, 2010 2:46 UTC (Sat) by arctanx (subscriber, #59239) [Link]

I'm not quite sure what the problem is. Maybe if you find the right definitions Diaspora could be described as "vaporware", "proprietary", "morally bankrupt" or anything at all.

They've said right from the beginning that they have this plan for a project and they're going to open up the source after three months. Everyone's perfectly aware of the fact that we're taking a leap of faith that they're going to deliver on their promises. Everyone realises that what comes out at the end of the three months could be disappointing.

It's their project. They set the terms of its development and those who donated agree. If you don't think those terms are good, ignore it. There's no need to start labelling the project with words which have negative connotations like "vaporware" until they deviate from doing what they always promised to do.

An overdue update from the Diaspora team

Posted Aug 28, 2010 2:55 UTC (Sat) by Trelane (subscriber, #56877) [Link]

Maybe if you find the right definitions Diaspora could be described as "vaporware", "proprietary", "morally bankrupt" or anything at all.

If by "the right definitions" you mean "three out of four" then sure, you can call it vaporware. The other two need more justification.

They set the terms of its development and those who donated agree.

Bully for them.

If you don't think those terms are good, ignore it.

So if I don't agree, I should just shut up? Nice. I have heard this before, although usually in the context of "If you don't like it, then just don't buy it."

There's no need to start labelling the project with words which have negative connotations like "vaporware" until they deviate from doing what they always promised to do.

But the definition fits, and it's particularly strange that the term is so applicable to a project whose entire focus and raison d'être is Free Software. That's perhaps what prompted me to speak up.

An overdue update from the Diaspora team

Posted Aug 28, 2010 2:58 UTC (Sat) by Trelane (subscriber, #56877) [Link]

(three out of three definitions if you consider that the German version may differ due to regional differences in the term, and that I'm not part of that region atm)