The Internet's Tower of Babel 🛕

Now the whole earth had one language and one speech. And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar, and they dwelt there. Then they said to one another, "Come, let us make bricks and bake them thoroughly." They had brick for stone, and they had asphalt for mortar. And they said, "Come, let us build ourselves a city, and a tower whose top is in the heavens; let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth."

But the LORD came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built. And the LORD said, "Indeed the people are one and they all have one language, and this is what they begin to do; now nothing that they propose to do will be withheld from them. Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, that they may not understand one another's speech." So the LORD scattered them abroad from there over the face of all the earth, and they ceased building the city. Therefore its name is called Babel, because there the LORD confused the language of all the earth; and from there the LORD scattered them abroad over the face of all the earth.

— Gen 11:1-9 (New King James Version)

Now, I'm not the kind of guy that would quote the bible. Well, at least I thought I was, up to this point. But no other story better outlines how the way we communicate on the internet has changed over the decades.

This posts marks a premiere for my blog. This month, for the first time ever, I participate in the IndieWeb Carnival, where people in the blogosphere are invited to write about a specific topic. Every month, someone else hosts the Carnival and thinks of a topic for everyone else to write about.

So here are my thoughts about this month's topic: "Digital Relationships", hosted by Manuel Moreale.

Languages are protocols for communication

The fundament for human relationships, no matter if digital or analog, is communication. In order to communicate, there are agreed upon protocols.

Languages, of course, are the protocols that we use to talk to each other.

The challenge of using language as a protocol is the diversity of languages in the world. While there used to be a single, unified language spoken by all the people, today we have a multitude of languages.

Well, at least according to the story of the Tower of Babel.

Communication protocols on the internet

In the digital world, protocols allow data transmission between computers. Just like with languages, they enable communication.

Open protocols vs. proprietary protocols

In the early days of the internet, these protocols were established. Email or the web itself were created upon open protocols for everyone to make use of. A shared language on the internet was born.

Already in the 90ies, when chat protocols emerged, a lot of this shared and open ideology got into turmoil.

Years before an open chat protocol called XMPP was formalized, big tech dominated the market. Chat clients such as ICQ, AIM and MSN used proprietary protocols, that were designed to only allow communication amongst each other.

In the mid-200s, when social media became a thing this trend was only amplified.

Platforms like Facebook, LinkedIn or Instagram never operated amongst each other.

Today, I can write an email from my email provider Fastmail to my friend who's using Gmail (open protocol), but I can't follow an Instagram account from my LinkedIn (proprietary protocols).

The problem with proprietary protocols

Proprietary protocols create two problems:

1. They create a communication barrier.
2. They are controlled by a single instance.

The communication barrier

One day in 2021, when WhatsApp updated their privacy policy, I decided to switch all my communication over to Signal. Since the majority of my friends used WhatsApp though, there was no way for me to talk to them.

It's as if I spoke German and they spoke Portuguese.

The single instance

There used to be a time when Twitter was cool. This was the same time, when people still called it "Twitter" and not "X (formerly known as Twitter)". But then a rich millionaire came along and ruined it for everyone.

All of a sudden, many people on the platform realized, that they trusted their data with a single instance that possessed too much power.

Digital Markets Acts

With the Digital Markets Act, the European Union aims to break down the communication silos that have been built up in the last decades.

The Digital Markets Act is the EU’s law to make the markets in the digital sector fairer and more contestable.

˗ Digital Markets Act

Meta, among others, has been identified as a "gate keeper". For WhatsApp, one of its services, Meta must now provide interfaces that enable communication with smaller messaging services. With that, the EU is trying to solve problem #1 "communication barrier" from above.

It feels like the EU is assuming a role as a parent, telling its children to stop arguing and to finally make peace.

However, Signal and Threema do not agree with WhatsApp's privacy practices and therefore refuse to break down the walls.

Why? Well, because there is still problem #2 "the single instance". Meta simply possess too much power and smaller messaging services don't trust that Meta will protect users' privacy, when it opens up its doors.

Nice try though, EU.

The savior of the internet

There is one potential savior out there (to stay in biblical terms). The Fediverse.

It works with, and you guessed it, an open protocol called ActivityPub, that enables communication among other platforms that also work with ActivityPub.

The Fediverse is solving both problems that proprietary protocols can't:

1. The communication barrier problem is solved by using a protocol that allows interoperability.
2. The single instance problem is solved by federation.

Interoperability

There are open source tools on the Fediverse, similar to the tools we know from big tech.

Some examples:

• Pixelfed is the Fediverse's Instagram.
• PeerTube is the Fediverse's YouTube.
• Mastodon is the Fediverse's X (formerly known as Twitter).

Since all the tools use ActivityPub, they interoperate. I could follow a Pixelfed account from Mastodon.

Federation

The biggest burden for people trying to join the Fediverse is when they have to choose an instance after sign up.

Just let me use Mastodon, I don't want to deal with selecting an "instance".

˗ Random person on the internet

But guess what, it's not a bug, it's a feature. Unlike with big tech platforms, where you are trusting your data with one (evil) corporation, thanks to federation, anyone could host their own instance on the Fediverse.

I could join the biggest instance on Mastodon, mastodon.social, but then one day decide to move to a smaller instance. I'm able to communicate with other instance nonetheless, since they all use ActivityPub.

Big tech joins the Fediverse

When Threads, Meta's answer to Elon Musk ruining Twitter, joined the Fediverse, it was a big step in the right direction. When at first, the reactions on the Fediverse were similar to those of small messaging services, there is a huge difference, outlined in "What to know about Threads", on the Mastodon blog:

• Meta can neither get any private data from users on other instances, nor track users on other instances.
• Meta can't insert ads onto other instances.
• Meta won't be able to collect any data about users from other instances.

ActivityPub, by design, doesn't allow privacy implication for users on the Fediverse.

In the last months, Threads has started to open up. It's testing federation. I was able to follow the Threads account of Adam Mosseri, head of Instagram from my Mastodon account.

Eugen Rochko, CEO of Mastodon sums up what this all means for the Fediverse:

The fact that large platforms are adopting ActivityPub is not only validation of the movement towards decentralized social media, but a path forward for people locked into these platforms to switch to better providers. Which in turn, puts pressure on such platforms to provide better, less exploitative services. This is a clear victory for our cause, hopefully one of many to come.

˗ Eugen Rochko

The Internet's Tower of Babel

When people tried to build the Tower of Babel, they were arrogant enough to challenge God's sovereignty.

Similarly, it might have been an arrogant notion that we could build an internet in which we have one shared language.

But is the idea of an open internet, that cares about its users and communicates with open protocols really so arrogant?

I believe the Fediverse will let us all remember that we once shared the same language. And it's finally time to talk. 💬