1·
1 year agoUtkin hasn’t been really relevant for Wagner in recent years and is definitely not leading it. While their involvement in Ukraine might be for glory, their usual interests are monetary, their control over various oil fields, lumber, and gold mines in Syria, CAR, Mali providing a steady sanction-proof revenue stream. They also further the Russian’s state geopolitical interests while maintaining plausible deniability.
They are nationalistic, opportunistic whatever, but not “Leading a war for conquest and nazi glory.”.
They do have neo-nazis/ultranationalists elements of course though, especially Rusish Group.
As someone who is cautiously optimistic about Meta’s ActivityPub adventure, my main disagreement with the author is over
I’d like to see ActivityPub and the Fediverse at large succeed, that is actually gain significant adoption among the average user, people that don’t care about freedom, decentralization etc. I disagree with a very common take on the Fediverse which seems to be “we don’t want to succeed, we want to make our happy little garden, it doesn’t matter if the overwhelming majority of people stay on centralized social media” because I think widespread adoption of federation (for social media, but also for code forges etc.) and open, interoperable protocols (matrix!) is important for society: less reliance on American tech giants, more resilience (services just shutting down as they run out of VC money impacts less content/users) and so on.
I only see widespread adoption happening through commercial entities setting up instances, the model of donation-supported admins simply doesn’t scale. The risk of EEE is very real though, but Meta making an ActivityPub move will hopefully be a signal for others to follow, and the best way of ensuring Meta doesn’t subvert ActivityPub development is by having other stakeholders that are just as important to counterbalance its influence, not by having 5k-10k-users instances de-federate from Threads because their admin (rightfully!) doesn’t like Meta.