From 457ab451a19c8e42e7e2dfe02d78fa33435a1680 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: cinereal Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 10:28:21 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] init --- fediversity.md | 2231 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 2231 insertions(+) create mode 100644 fediversity.md diff --git a/fediversity.md b/fediversity.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..a0890a0 --- /dev/null +++ b/fediversity.md @@ -0,0 +1,2231 @@ +[]{#anchor}Fediversity + +# []{#anchor-1}Index + +# []{#anchor-2}History of changes + + ------------ ----------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- + 2023-10-10 Page 1-41 Changed the name of the acronym of the project to Fediversity + 2023-10-10 Page 5 added a paragraph on the use of open hardware + 2023-10-10 Page 11 added two paragraphs on the selection of different NGI technologies + 2023-10-10 Page 29 added more elaborate justification of the purchase costs + 2023-10-10 Page 34 updated list of activities and costs eligible for funding + 2023-10-12 Page 14 Updated security measures periodic checking + 2023-10-12 Page 21 Added APELL to the identified partners list. + 2023-10-12 Page 41 Updated Gant Chart + 2023-10-12 Page 3 Added Open Source, Open Standards, Open Dependencies + 2023-10-12 Page 15 Added work package interdependencies and added a new page + + + + + + ------------ ----------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- + +# []{#anchor-3}0 Preamble + +Let's make the internet once again the safe and collaborative, thus +federated, space that it originally promised to be. + +Fediversity is part of the future of open collaboration and open +discussion, forming a federated safe space for what used to be called +social networking. The Fediverse, funded by the NGI program as an +implementation of such a federated space, is already taking shape and +approaching ten million users. It has special safeguards for +marginalized and oppressed groups in our global society. This NGI +technology is mature enough to be joined by older institutions and +organizations, many tech-savvy media outlets and public institutions +have already joined ^[^1]^. But for wider adoption the Fediverse needs +to be supported by dedicated and knowledgeable support organisations, +for which this project will lay the groundwork in the form of +reproducible deployment configurations, how-to documents, cookbooks, +playbooks and descriptions of success stories. + +Not only will we create a complete script for support organisations that +want to host Fediverse services and other open discussion tools on how +to deploy them on their infrastructure, we will also onboard several +public organisations that want to use these services to show-case, and +to gain and document experience on do's and don'ts. After all, public +communication infrastructure, even though very practical, isn't easy to +do and this project is accordingly about creating a simple to use, very +practical and safe environment to communicate, assembling various +powerful components that NGI and others have built into unified +end-to-end services. This is where we can make a difference, especially +in contrast to existing centralized solutions owned by Big Tech. + +**Open Source, Open Standards, Open Dependencies\ +**All software used, produced or needed by our project and it\'s +outcomes will be licensed under a valid Open Source Software license, +will not be encumbered by patents unless covered under the Open +Invention Network and will not use API\'s or services that are not +reproducible in a fully free manner. The only exception is for the UX +design test-lab environment that will be used to ensure maximum +interoperability with closed source but widely used systems and software +(like operating systems and web-browsers). + +No software specific for or usable by any single organisation will be +created or produced under this grant. + +# []{#anchor-4}1 Excellence + +## []{#anchor-5}1.1 Objectives and ambition + +Objectives + +Fediversity: Privacy-friendly, sustainable, transparent fair Open +Internet Discourse The Open Internet Discourse Foundation project +Fediversity is an effort to bring easy-to-use, hosted cloud services +with personal freedom at their core to individuals and institutions. We +want to provide everyone with high-quality, secure IT systems for +everyday use. Without tracking, without exploitation, in a way that +makes sustainable use of the world. + +The goal of this project is to have a major impact on the future of the +internet, our societies and economies -- a unique and meaningful +contribution to the *Next Generation Internet* initiative: + +The proposed work aims to generate new business opportunities by +**hosting open social platforms for public organizations and educational +institutions. By offering a package of ActivityPub services** that +emphasize on user control and privacy. The project aims to provide +hosting organizations with a clear roadmap to implement and monetize +those offerings and aims to attract both public and educational +institutions as potential users. The main objective is to offer an +**alternative to big tech services and companies that operate closed +ecosystems** ^[^2]^ , thereby creating a safe social network (open +internet discourse) where end-users have control over the content they +share. + +ActivityPub is a protocol that enables interoperability between +different social media platforms, allowing users to connect and +communicate across different networks. It is the de-facto standard for +interoperable social media and even some of the big social media +platforms are starting to adopt it as well ^3[^3]^. By building services +based on this protocol, our project aims to promote decentralization and +data portability, which are key principles of the NGI programme. + +This objective aligns with the work programme topic by promoting +innovation in the area of open social platforms and advancing the +development of alternative digital solutions that are more user-centric +and transparent. + +To achieve this objective, our project will need to work on several +fronts. First,we will need to develop a way to deliver the software that +implements the ActivityPub protocol and provides users with a social +media platform that is easy to use and accessible. We need to do this in +a predictable and sustainable way. This will require expertise in +software development and system administration, user experience design, +and user engagement. Second, we will need to build partnerships with +organizations and institutions that can help promote the use of those +services. This will require outreach and engagement strategies that are +tailored to different sectors and demographics. + +Another objective of the proposed work is to offer a **federated +approach to social media and communication**. This increases privacy +because we prioritize user privacy by giving users control over their +own data. Users can choose to use different servers based on their own +privacy preferences, and can even run their own servers if they wish to. +This means that the proposed Activity-Pub services will be designed to +allow users to interact with each other across different platforms and +services, creating a more **decentralized and connected online +environment**. This objective is important as it promotes a more open +and democratic approach to social media and communication that is not +reliant on a few dominant platforms. + +In addition, the team will have to find ways to ensure that all parts of +our services use** open-source software (and hardware where possible)**. +This will promote transparency and enable end-users to verify that their +data is being handled ethically and in compliance with data privacy +regulations. It also contains Freedom. Open source software is by +definition accompanied by open source licenses, which give users the +freedom to use, modify, and distribute the software as they see fit, +without restrictions or limitations. + +On the point of **open hardware: **even though we would love to do +further research on the possibilities of the use of open hardware we +already know from our experience in trying to use open hardware in the +past that this is a hugely expensive thing to do. One of the main +problems here is that initiatives like NixOS currenly only support x64 +based architectures. The use of (for example) OpenPower or RiscV would +require a massive investment in basic operating system principles. + +The proposed ActivityPub services will also be designed to be **fully +portable** (something we like to call **'service portability'**). This +means that users will be able to (easily and fully) switch between +different hosting providers and platforms without losing their data or +online presence. This objective is important as it promotes user control +and choice, allowing users to choose a way of offering services that +best meets their needs without being locked into a particular platform +or service and it gives users more flexibility, it being hosted or +selfhosted. + +The use of service portability also enhances the security of the data +and reducesthe risk of data loss or corruption during a transition from +one provider to another. + +Just providing the service won't be enough. We need to make sure our +proposed services will successfully be adopted via outreach, marketing, +partnerships and support. A list of objectives related to this topic: + +**Raising awareness about the benefits of decentralized, federated +social media and communication.** The first objective of outreach and +marketing efforts should be to educate potential customers about the +benefits of decentralized, federated social media and communication. +This may involve creating marketing materials that explain the +advantages of ActivityPub services, such as greater user control, +increased privacy, and more diverse online communities. + +**Engaging with potential customers through targeted marketing and +outreach campaigns.** In order to reach potential customers, outreach +and marketing efforts should be targeted towards public organizations +and educational institutions. This may involve creating specific +campaigns that address the unique needs and concerns of each group, as +well as utilizing social media, email marketing, and other digital +marketing channels to reach a wider audience. + +**Developing partnerships and collaborations with relevant organizations +and influencers.** Another objective of outreach and marketing efforts +should be to develop partnerships and collaborations with relevant +organizations and influencers. This may involve partnering with other +open-source software providers or industry associations to promote the +benefits of federated social media and communication, as well as +collaborating with influencers or through leaders in the industry to +raise awareness of the proposed ActivityPub services. + +**Providing customer support and training to ensure successful +adoption.** Once potential customers have expressed interest in the +proposed ActivityPub services, it will be important to provide them with +customer support and training to ensure successful adoption. This may +involve offering onboarding sessions, providing technical support, and +creating training materials that help users understand how to use the +ActivityPub services effectively. + +**Monitoring and evaluating adoption rates and customer satisfaction.** +Finally, it will be important to monitor and evaluate adoption rates and +customer satisfaction with the proposed ActivityPub services. This may +involve tracking user engagement, conducting customer satisfaction +surveys, and analyzing feedback to identify areas for improvement and +ensure ongoing success. + +**Relevancy **Overall, this proposal is highly relevant to the HORIZON +EU Programme, specifically to the Human-centric Internet topic. The +objective of this topic is to support research and innovation in +creating a more human-centric internet that prioritizes user privacy, +security, and control, while also promoting the ethical use of +technology. The proposed work aligns with this objective by promoting a +federated approach to social media that prioritizes user control and +privacy, and by using open-source software and hardware to promote +transparency and ethical use. + +**Measurability **Measuring the success of this objective will depend on +several metrics, such as the number of users who sign up for our +services, the level of engagement among users, and the number of +organizations and institutions that adopt our platform. Verifying the +success of this objective will require user feedback, engagement +metrics, and independent audits to ensure that our services are meeting +the highest standards of privacy and security. + +The proposed work is realistically achievable. The use of open-source +software and hardware, along with the focus on portability, will enable +the proposed ActivityPub services to be easily adopted by our target +audiences. The proposed federated approach to social media and +communication aligns with the growing demand for decentralized and +user-controlled alternatives to traditional social media platforms. + +Ambition + +**Decentralized, federated social media and communication:** Our +proposed project focuses on developing ActivityPub services for +decentralized, federated social media and communication. Although some +decentralized social media platforms already exist, they are often not +interoperable and not widely deployed. Our project aims to provide a +comprehensive set of ActivityPub services that makes it easy for hosting +companies and public organizations to adopt and use decentralized social +media and communication tools. This is a new concept that goes beyond +the state-of-the-art in terms of offering a complete and easy-to-use +package of services for decentralized, federated social media and +communication. The proposed project aims to provide open social +platforms that are an alternative to closed ecosystems (such as Twitter +and Facebook) offered by large tech companies. This is an ambitious goal +because it requires a significant shift in how people use and access +social media. + +**Use of open-source software and hardware:** Another innovative aspect +of our proposed project is the extensive use of open-source software and +hardware. While open-source software is becoming more common, the use of +open-source hardware is less common in the tech industry. (Our project +aims to promote the use of open-source hardware and provide a model for +others to follow in this regard.) This is an ambitious goal that +demonstrates a commitment to the principles of openness and +transparency. + +**Portability of services:** The project plans to offer portability of +services, allowing users to easily export their data from the platform +and import it on another platform. This is a unique feature beyond what +is currently available on the market. + +## + +## []{#anchor-6}1.2 Methodology + +For the software development side of things (developing the ActivityPub +packages to provide the corresponding services like Mastodon in an easy +fashion), we will use the Agile methodology. + +The main takeaway here is 'iterative development', which means the +development process is a cycle, where we go back through the steps based +on feedback and challenges that present themselves along the way. + +1. **Planning:** During the planning phase, the team will identify the + key features and requirements of the ActivityPub service packages. + This will involve collaborating with stakeholders and users to + understand their needs and expectations. The team will then create a + prioritized list of features and user stories, which will form the + basis of the development plan. +2. **Designing:** In the designing phase, the team will create the + overall architecture and design of the software. This will involve + defining the various components of the ActivityPub service packages, + such as the user interface, database schema, and application + programming interfaces (APIs). The team will also identify any + third-party libraries or tools that would be needed to implement the + software. +3. **Coding:** During the coding phase, the team will start + implementing the software. The Agile methodology emphasizes on + working in short, focused iterations, so the team will break down + the development work into small, manageable tasks. Each task would + be assigned to a team member, who would work on it until it is + completed. +4. **Testing:** The testing phase involves verifying that the software + works as expected. The team will develop a suite of automated tests + that cover all the key features and scenarios of the ActivityPub + service packages. This will include unit tests, integration tests, + and end-to-end tests. The team will also perform manual testing to + ensure that the user experience is smooth and error-free. +5. **Releasing:** The final phase of the Agile methodology is releasing + the software to users. The team will deploy the ActivityPub service + packages to a production environment, and monitor its performance + and user feedback. The team will then use this feedback to inform + further iterations of the software, and prioritize the next set of + features and improvements. + +In the context of building partnerships, mainly with public +organisations and NRENs, we will apply Design Thinking as a methodology. + +Design Thinking is a user-centered, iterative methodology that is used +to solve complex problems and create innovative solutions. It involves a +five-step process that includes empathy, definition, ideation, +prototyping, and testing. The following is an overview of how Design +Thinking can be applied to build partnerships with public organizations +and research and educational institutions: + +1. **Empathy:** The first step in the Design Thinking process is to + understand the needs, goals, and challenges of the target partners. + This can be done through research, interviews, surveys, and other + forms of data collection. By empathizing with the target partners, + we can gain a deeper understanding of their perspectives and + identify opportunities for collaboration. +2. **Definition:** Once we have a clear understanding of the target + partners' needs, goals, and challenges, we can define the problem + space and identify areas of mutual interest. This involves + synthesizing the research data and creating a problem statement that + is focused on meeting the target partners' needs. +3. **Ideation:** The ideation phase involves generating a wide range of + ideas for how we can address the problem statement and meet the + target partners' needs. This can be done through brainstorming + sessions, workshops, and other forms of collaborative ideation. The + goal is to generate a diverse set of ideas that can be evaluated and + refined in the next phase. +4. **Prototyping:** In the prototyping phase, we create low-fidelity + prototypes of the most promising ideas generated in the ideation + phase. These prototypes can take the form of mockups, wireframes, or + other simple prototypes that can be tested and evaluated with the + target partners. +5. **Testing:** The final phase of the Design Thinking process involves + testing the prototypes with the target partners and gathering + feedback. This feedback can be used to refine the prototypes and + develop a more detailed plan for collaboration. + +To apply Design Thinking to our project, we would start by conducting +research and gathering data on the needs, goals, and challenges of +public organizations and educational and research institutions that +could be potential partners. This can involve interviews with key +stakeholders, surveys of potential partners, and analysis of existing +data sources. + +Using this research, we will then define the problem space and identify +areas of mutual interest. This will involve creating a problem statement +that focuses on meeting the needs of public organizations and +educational and research institutions in the area of federated social +networking. + +Next, we will generate a wide range of ideas for how we can address the +problem statement and meet the needs of potential partners. This will +involve brainstorming sessions, workshops, and other forms of +collaborative ideation with key stakeholders. + +Using the ideas generated in the ideation phase, we will then create +low-fidelity prototypes of the most promising ideas. + +Finally, we will test the prototypes (alphas, betas of our services) +with potential partners and gather feedback. This feedback will then be +used to refine the prototypes and develop a more detailed plan for +collaboration. Through this process, we can build strong partnerships +with public organizations and research and educational institutions that +are based on mutual benefit and shared decision-making. + +Our project is designed to comply with the 'do no significant harm' +principle as per Article 17 of Regulation (EU) No 2020/852. We are +committed to ensuring that our methodology is environmentally friendly +and does not significantly harm any of the six environmental objectives +of the EU Taxonomy Regulation. + +Regarding the use of artificial intelligence (AI) based systems, we do +not plan to use AI in our project. However, if we were to use AI, we +would ensure that our systems are technically robust, socially robust, +reliable, and able to provide suitable explanations of their +decision-making processes. We would also follow industry-standard +practices and regulations to minimize any unintended harm and safeguard +the physical and mental integrity of humans. + +To make sure we can achieve our project objectives, we have outlined a +project management strategy: + +- We will develop a clear and detailed project plan: This will outline + the tasks that need to be completed, who is responsible for each + task, timelines, and dependencies. +- Establish effective communication: Regular communication with all + stakeholders is crucial for keeping everyone informed about + progress, identifying and addressing issues, and ensuring that + everyone is on the same page. To this end we will also outline a + communication plan to make sure all relevant stakeholders (European + Commission, team members, both internal as external contractors) are + well-informed throughout the process. +- Monitor progress: Regular monitoring of project progress against the + plan can help identify any potential delays or issues and allow for + adjustments to be made to keep the project on track. +- Mitigate risks: Identify potential risks and develop strategies for + mitigating them. This can help reduce the likelihood of delays or + failures. +- Ensure proper resource allocation: Make sure that resources, + including staff, budget, and technology, are allocated appropriately + to support theproject objectives. +- Stay flexible: We are prepared to adjust the project plan and + approach as needed to ensure that objectives are met. + +Integrating NGI technologies, projects and tools into our proposed work +can help to leverage existing expertise and resources in the field and +build upon the work of other researchers and innovators. Some examples +of NGI technologies and other technologies that will be evaluated to be +integrated into our project are the +following:![](Pictures/100048410000111F000013C76C98E745D4C15CD9.svg){width="1.2165in" +height="1.4055in"} + +[**Mastodon**](https://joinmastodon.org/): This federated microblogging +platform is already getting tractionas the alternative to the Twitter +platform and will most certainly be included in our business +development. We aim however to not make this a 'single offering'. We +want to also include other ActivityPub projects and even other NGI +technologies. We believe bundling projects as a combined offering is the +way to create a solid business case. + +[**Peertube**](https://joinpeertube.org/): This alternative to Big +Tech's video platforms is already getting known, but there is not too +much content to be found. We aim to include Peertube in combination with +other ActivityPub projects in such a way that makes it easy to start +using it. Peertube could be a separate 'single offering'. + +[**Pixelfed**](https://pixelfed.org/): This service to quickly and +easily share pictures with other people, +which![](Pictures/1000832F00001126000013CFFE7D3120C542E28D.svg){width="1.2071in" +height="1.3937in"} could be seen as an alternative to Instagram, needs a +good reason to be included in serious environments like research +projects. We will have to find out if there are good use cases for this +tool in the public sector. + +[**IRMA/Yivi**](https://nlnet.nl/project/IRMA-made-easy): We will most +certainly use IRMA (soon to be Yivi) as a strong and privacy friendly +way to log in to services. + +[**Hubzilla**](https://nlnet.nl/project/Hubzilla): We expect Hubzilla to +be a better choice than Mastodon in some use cases. + +[**Let's Connect! VPN**](https://nlnet.nl/project/LetsConnect-P2P): This +open and easy-to-use VPN solution might just provide the fully private +environment and extra security for use cases where secrecy +is![](Pictures/100086E70000111F000013C7258F044CA4EE0031.svg){width="1.1909in" +height="1.3756in"} needed that projects designed to be open to the world +cannot provide. + +[**Matrix**](https://matrix.org/): The Matrix protocol and corresponding +servers will most certainly be part of the suite of products that will +be offered. + +[**Owncast**](https://nlnet.nl/project/Owncast): As a companion to +Peertube, Owncast might prove very interesting as alternative to Big +Tech's streaming solutions, such as Twitch. + +[**NixOS**](https://nixos.org/): We will certainly use NixOS as a basis +for all our services. We see +NixOS![](Pictures/1000542F0000111F000013C771F768BC3ED83C54.svg){width="1.2055in" +height="1.3925in"} as the only way to reliably create a reproducible +outcome for all the work we create. + +[**SCION**](https://nlnet.nl/project/SCION-Swarm/): We will try to +include the SCION networking features in our offerings, especially since +they are in many places already used by universities and research +institutions. + +The list above are just examples, we will evaluate more options and try +to find added value in the combination of different technologies. + +Which NGI technologies will eventually be chosen to use, is very much +dependant on the value for actual use they provide based on the outcome +of our research with the stakeholders. We aim for maximum value to the +stakeholders based on the technologies available. + +In **any case we will implement** the following technologies in our +offerings: **NixOS** as a foundation, and \'fediverse packages\': +**Mastodon**, **Peertube**, **Pixelfed** and **Matrix**. + +Which other packages we will descide to support will depend in part on +the outcome of the \'pilot projects\' that will be requested by the +NORDUnet members and in part on the packages that will be adressed in +the \'subgrant projects\' that will be requested in the \'open calls\'. +The result of the work in both the hosting and public organisations +verticals should be generic enough to support all NGI packages +sufficiently documented and packaged in NixOS. + +In the pursuit of our objectives to generate new business opportunities +in hosting 'Open Social Platforms' and providing a safe social network +alternative to large closed ecosystems social media, we recognize the +importance of a multi-disciplinary approach. We believe that integrating +expertise and methods from different disciplines will be critical in +achieving our goals. + +Our team consists of individuals with backgrounds in software +development, system administration, data privacy, marketing, and +business development. We will also seek the input and collaboration of +experts in fields such as social science, media studies, and education. + +For instance, to make our products easily usable for end-users who +typically do not have in-depth knowledge of open-source software, we +will need to incorporate user experience design and human-computer +interaction principles. We will also need to work with experts in data +privacy and cybersecurity to ensure that our platforms are secure and +protect user data. In addition, we will collaborate with experts in +media and education to ensure that our services are accessible to these +groups and meet their needs. + +We will establish cross-functional teams to ensure that all expertise +and methods are integrated efficiently. We will also hold regular +meetings and workshops to facilitate communication and collaboration +between team members from different disciplines. + +In summary, we believe that integrating expertise and methods from +different disciplines will be essential in achieving our objectives of +providing a safe social network alternative and generating new business +opportunities. We will work closely with experts from various fields to +ensure that our platforms meet the needs of end-users and stakeholders, +and we will continue to prioritize cross-disciplinary collaboration +throughout the project. + +Integrating social sciences and humanities into our project would be +essential to ensure that the development of the open social platforms is +aligned with ethical and societal considerations. Specifically, social +sciences and humanities expertise could help us understand the potential +social and economic impacts of our project, and how we can ensure that +the benefits are widely distributed and inclusive. + +For example, we will engage social scientists to study user behavior and +preferences to ensure that the platforms are user-friendly, accessible, +and engaging. Humanities experts could help us address ethical issues +related to user data privacy, content moderation, and community +guidelines. Additionally, social sciences expertise could be valuable in +developing effective marketing and out-reach strategies to promote the +use of our open social platforms. + +To integrate social sciences and humanities into our project, we will +establish collaborations with academic institutions or research +organizations specialized in these fields. We will also invite social +scientists and humanities scholars to participate in project meetings, +workshops, and conferences to provide their feedback and insights. +Furthermore, we will prioritize conducting user studies, surveys, and +focus groups to capture feedback from diverse groups of users and +stakeholders. + +Gender dimension and global diversity + +To ensure that gender is taken into account in this project, it is +important to conduct a gender analysis and to integrate a gender +perspective into all aspects of the project, from the design and +implementation of the ActivityPub services to the outreach and marketing +efforts. This may involve, for example, ensuring that the platform is +accessible and user-friendly for all genders, conducting user research +that takes into account the diverse needs and perspectives of different +genders, and engaging with organizations and influencers that have a +strong focus on gender equality and women's empowerment. Some more +specific ways we want to ensure that the gender dimension is taken into +account for our project: + +1. **Gender-neutral language:** We'll ensure that language used in the + project materials is gender-inclusive. For instance, we'll use + "they" instead of "he" or "she" when referring to an unknown person. + We'll also ensure that titles and descriptions are gender-inclusive. + For instance, we'll use Mx instead of "Mr" or "Ms" and director + instead of "directress" or "director\". +2. **Data collection:** We'll collect data on gender to help identify + any potential gender disparities or biases in the project. This can + help ensure that the project is inclusive and equitable. +3. **Stakeholder engagement:** We'll engage with stakeholders, + including women's groups, people of color, LGBTQ+ individuals and + other marginalized communities, to ensure that their perspectives + and needs are considered in the project design and implementation. +4. **Impact assessment:** We'll conduct a gender impact assessment to + identify the potential gender disparities and ensure that the + project has a positive impact on whichever gender or non-gender + people identify as and that the information won't be use to + discriminate any gender or non-gender person. + +One of the nice things about using the NGI technologies that make up the +Fediverse (i.e. ActivityPub protocol, Mastodon, Peertube et all) is that +they have been designed by and are used by groups of people that are +typically not welcome in Big Tech offerings due to there +gender-diversity. Queer and Transpeople are very well represented on +Mastodon for example. This fact makes the whole project support +gender-inclusiveness and global diversity on a higher level. + +As a team, we can adopt several open science practices to ensure our +project is transparent, reproducible, and accessible. For instance, we +can use open-source tools to develop and share our code, data, and +research findings. We can also document our work flow and methodology to +allow others to reproduce our results. Additionally, we can make our +project more inclusive by involving a diverse set of contributors, and +by considering the gender dimension when designing and implementing our +project. Overall, open science practices can enhance the quality and +impact of our work while promoting collaboration and knowledge sharing +with the wider scientific community. Some more specific examples: + +1. **Open source software:** Using open source software for our project + allows for transparency and encourages collaboration with other + parties. We can use open source tools and libraries for data + analysis and other tasks and also contribute to other ongoing open + source projects. +2. **Code sharing:** Sharing our code on open source platforms like + GitLab and BitBucket allows others to see and use our code, + replicate our results, and build on our work. This encourages + collaboration, improved code quality, openness and transparency, and + reproducibility. +3. **Data sharing:** Sharing our data can be done through open data + platforms like Kaggle or Zenodo. This allows others to access our + data and use it for their own research. It also encourages + transparency and reproducibility. +4. **Pre-registration:** Pre-registering our study or analysis plan in + a public repository, such as the Open Science Framework (OSF), can + help prevent data dredging and increase the transparency and + reproducibility of our work. +5. **Open peer review:** Sharing our research and inviting feedback + from peers can lead to valuable insights and collaboration and that + will improve the quality of the end-product. We can use open peer + review platforms like PeerJ or F1000Research to encourage this. +6. **Licensing:** Choosing an open source license for our project can + ensure that others can use, modify, and distribute your work, while + also giving credit to the original author. Common open source + licenses include the MIT License, Apache License, and GNU General + Public License. + +By incorporating these open science practices into our project, we can +promote transparency, collaboration, and reproducibility, which can +ultimately lead to more impact-full end result. + +Research **data management and management of other research outputs:** +Applicants generating/collecting data and/or other research outputs +(except for publications) during the project must provide maximum 1 page +on how the data/research outputs will be managed in line with the FAIR +principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable), addressing +the following (the description should be specific to your project): + +As part of our project, we will be generating and collecting various +types of data and research outputs, such as experimental data, images, +and numerical data. In order to manage these outputs effectively, we +will follow the **FAIR principles**, which promote data that is +**Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable.** + +To ensure our data is **Findable**, we will assign each data set a +unique and persistent identifier, such as a digital object identifier +(DOI). The data will be available and contain information about the +creator, date of creation and any associated publications. We will also +use trusted repositories to store our data, making it easier for others +to discover and access. + +To make our data **Accessible**, we will provide open access to our data +whenever possible. If there are restrictions on the data, we will +clearly explain why and provide provisions for access to restricted data +for verification purposes. + +**Interoperability** will be ensured by adhering to standards, formats, +and vocabularies for data and metadata. This will make it easier for +others to understand and clear that they are designed with reuse and +interoperability in mind. + +Finally, we will ensure our data is **Reusable** by using appropriate +licenses for data sharing and re-use, such as Creative Commons or Open +Data Commons licenses. We will also make tools, software, and models +available to enable others to generate, validate, and interpret our +data. The data will be well documented with clear descriptions of the +data collection methods, data processing steps and any relevant +assumptions or limitations. + +Throughout the project, we will assign a person or team responsible for +data management and quality assurance, and we will estimate the curation +and storage/preservation costs for the data. By following these +practices and developing a detailed data management plan (DMP) for +making our data Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable, we +will ensure that our research outputs are of the highest quality and can +be widely shared and used by others. + +Methodology challenges + +One of the challenges we have identified is ensuring the security and +privacy of our users' data. To overcome this challenge, we will use +industry-standard open-source encryption methods and regularly update +our software and hardware solutions to stay ahead of potential threats. +A periodic (monthly or bi-monthly) check if all security measures have +been taken and if any updates are needed will be held. Where and if +possible we will automate these checks and integrate them in a 24/7 +monitoring system.\ +Another challenge is that much of the software we aim to implement is +still fairly new and as a result still changes frequently, we will have +to keep up with the change and at the same time provide a stable and +predictable platform to our users. + +Work package interdependancies + +To give a clear view of what interdepencancies we expect: + +WP1 Project Management will keep an overview of all other Work Packages. + +WP2 Vertical: hosting will have a \'feedback loop\' with WP3 and feed to +WP6. + +WP3 Vertical: public organisations will have a \'feedback loop\' with +WP2 and feed to WP6 + +WP4 Open calls and grant management will feed back to the verticals and +feed to WP6 + +WP5 Enhancement & Usability will feed back to the verticals and feed to +WP6 + +This diagram graphically represents the relations: + +# []{#anchor-7}2 Impact + +## []{#anchor-8}2.1 Project's pathways towards impact + +Describe the unique contribution your project results would make towards +(1) the **outcomes** specified in this topic, and (2) the **wider +impacts**, in the longer term, specified in the respective destinations +in the work programme. + +Outcomes: + +- freedom of choice in the tools to use and (possibly) even alter to + your own likings, especially in digital human interaction +- more and better general availability of non-centrally managed social + public domain +- a more secure take on open and federated networks by institutions + State the target groups that would benefit. Even if target groups + are mentioned in general terms in the work programme, you should be + specific here, breaking target groups into particular interest + groups or segments of society relevant to this project. + +Target groups: + +- education institutes keeping control over their own data +- students given the chance to use open federated communication means + and being able to maintain their privacy +- research organisations keeping control over their own data +- public/governmental bodies not being tied in to Big Tech +- the democratic process (politics in general) not being manipulated + by Big Tech (foreign) companies + +General outcomes + +The outcomes and impacts of your project may: + +- Give a better understanding of how to run, implement and manage + federated social networks also in a more formalised structure. +- Give companies and organizations that specialize in running + decentralized internet infrastructure a better starting point. +- Safer social networks help prevent mental distress, take away the + paranoia that comes with the panopticum feeling you get with + centrally managed Big Tech infrastructure. These effects lower the + risk of assault due to minority targeting and prevent suicide and + mental health problems. + +Technological outcomes + +- Development of a user-friendly, open source social media platform + based on the ActivityPub protocol, with features that prioritize + user control, privacy, and data portability. +- Creation of tools and plugins that enable seamless integration with + existing social media platforms and applications, facilitating the + adoption of the federated approach. + +Economic outcomes + +- The proposed social media platform could offer a more cost-effective + alternative to existing closed ecosystems, providing public + organizations and educational institutions with a viable option for + their social media needs. +- The platform's decentralized nature could encourage the development + of new, innovative business models that prioritize user privacy and + data ownership, potentially disrupting the existing market dominated + by big tech companies. +- The project could lead to the creation of new jobs in the tech + industry, particularly in the area of decentralized technologies. + +Societal outcomes + +- The proposed platform could contribute to the creation of a more + open and democratic digital landscape, where users have more control + over their data and online interactions. +- The platform's focus on privacy and data portability could lead to + greater trust in social media platforms, which in turn could lead to + increased participation and engagement online. +- The project's promotion of a federated approach to social media and + communication could contribute to the development of a more diverse + and decentralized online ecosystem, which could have positive + implications for free speech, community building, and information + sharing. + +**Target groups further categorized (and how we can impact them)** +Public organizations and NRENs (National Research and Education +Networks) are broad target groups. We'll break them down in target +groups relevant for our project. + +Public organizations can include government agencies, non-profit +organizations, and public utilities. Some specific segments of public +organizations include: + +1. **Government organisations:** Municipalities, counties, and regional + governments can benefit from an open and decentralized social media + platform that allows them to communicate with their constituents in + a secure and transparent manner. Government agencies often need to + communicate with the public, but may not want to rely on commercial + social media platforms that collect and sell user data. Our platform + could provide a secure and privacy-respecting alternative for these + agencies to share information and engage with their constituents. +2. **Public health organizations:** In light of the ongoing COVID-19 + pandemic, public health organizations are under increasing pressure + to communicate information effectively and efficiently. An open and + decentralized social media platform could be used to share important + public health information, provide updates on the status of the + pandemic, and communicate with healthcare providers and other + stakeholders. Healthcare providers may need to communicate sensitive + information with patients and other providers, but must also comply + with strict privacy regulations. Our platform could provide a secure + and private way for these providers to share information and + collaborate on patient care. +3. **Non-profit organizations:** Non-profit organizations often have + limited resources and may not have the technical expertise to build + and maintain their own communication platforms. Our platform could + provide a low-cost and easy-to-use solution for these organizations + to engage with their supporters and spread their message, in an open + and transparent fashion. +4. **Educational institutions:** Schools, universities, and other + educational institutions can benefit from an open and decentralized + social media platform that allows them to communicate with students, + parents, and other stakeholders. Our project can help these + institutions to improve collaboration, knowledge sharing, and + engagement, and to provide a secure and private platform for + communication. Our platform could also provide an easy-to-use and + customizable tool for these institutions to facilitate discussion + and collaboration. + +National Research and Education Networks (NRENs) are high-speed networks +dedicated to research and education, connecting universities, research +institutions and other organizations. Some specific segments of NRENs +include: + +1. Universities and Research Institutions: These organizations need to + collaborate and share research data with other institutions across + the country or around the world. An open and decentralized social + media platform like the one proposed in your project could provide a + secure and standardized way for researchers to share data and + communicate with each other, while also maintaining control over + their own data and ensuring compliance with data protection + regulations. +2. Libraries and Archives: These organizations often manage large + collections of data and historical materials, including both + physical and digital assets. An open and decentralized platform + could provide a way for them to share and distribute this content, + making it more accessible to researchers and the public while also + preserving its authenticity and integrity. +3. Museums and cultural institutions: Museums and cultural institutions + can benefit from an open and decentralized social media platform + that allows them to engage with visitors and share information about + their collections and exhibits. Our project can help these + institutions to improve engagement and to reach new audiences. +4. Education and Training Providers: NRENs often provide access to + online learning resources and tools for students and educators. An + open and decentralized platform could provide a more flexible and + customizable way for these providers to deliver content, while also + ensuring privacy and security for their users. + +Based on the project objectives and potential impact on target groups, +the scale and significance of the project's contribution to the expected +outcomes and impacts can be estimated as follows: + +- Scale: The project's focus on developing an open and decentralized + social media platform can potentially benefit a large number of + users who are seeking alternatives to big tech companies that + operate closed ecosystems. The specific focus on public + organizations and NRENs can target a niche market but with + significant potential impact given the specific needs and + requirements of these groups. +- Significance: The significance of the project's contribution can be + evaluated based on several factors. For example, the platform's + ability to provide users with more control, privacy, and data + portability can have a significant impact on the way people interact + with social media, potentially leading to more trust and engagement. + The platform's focus on open source and federated approaches can + also foster innovation and collaboration, leading to a more diverse + and competitive social media landscape.\ + In addition, the project's potential economic impact can be + evaluated in terms of potential cost savings for public + organizations and NRENs who may be currently paying for + closed-source social media solutions. Finally, the project's + potential impact on digital rights and online privacy can have + significant societal implications, contributing to a more democratic + and transparent online environment. + +Quantitative estimates for these impacts will depend on the specific +implementation and adoption of the platform, but it is possible to make +some broad estimates based on existing data. For example, according to a +2020 survey by Pew Research Center, around 69% of US adults use social +media, indicating a large potential user base for an alternative +platform. In addition, a report by Research and Markets estimates that +the global social media management software market will reach \$17.7 +billion by 2026, indicating the potential economic impact of the +project's focus on open-source and cost-effective solutions. Some other +specific possible quantitative estimates: + +1. User adoption: If our project is successful in providing a + user-friendly and privacy-focused social media platform, it could + attract a significant number of users. For example, if the platform + gains a 5% share of the global social media market by 2026, which is + currently estimated at 3.6 billion users, that would translate to + 180 million users. +2. Cost savings: By promoting the use of open-source software and + decentralized infrastructure, our project could lead to cost savings + for public organizations and NRENs. For example, if a large public + organization is currently spending \$1 million per year on a + closed-source social media platform, switching to your open-source + platform could result in cost savings of up to 50%. +3. Data portability: Your project's focus on data portability could + have significant benefits for users, allowing them to easily switch + between social media platforms and take their data with them. For + example, if 10% of users on a major social media platform decided to + switch to your platform, and were able to easily transfer their + data, that would equate to millions of users being able to regain + control over their data. +4. Market disruption: If our project is successful in disrupting the + market dominance of big tech companies in the social media space, it + could have far-reaching impacts. For example, if our platform gains + a significant share of the market, it could lead to a decrease in + the power of big tech companies and more competition in the social + media space, potentially leading to improved user privacy and better + options for data management. + +There are several requirements and potential barriers that may determine +whether the desired outcomes and impacts of the project are achieved. +Some of them are: + +1. Technical challenges: Developing an open and decentralized social + media platform based on the ActivityPub protocol can be technically + challenging. The project will need to address issues related to + scalability, performance, security, and interoperability with other + systems. Failure to overcome these technical challenges may hinder + the project's ability to achieve its desired outcomes and impacts. +2. Adoption by target groups: The success of the project will depend on + the adoption of the platform by its target groups, such as public + organizations and NRENs. The project will need to demonstrate the + benefits of the platform and convince potential users to switch from + their current social media platforms to the new one. Failure to + achieve significant adoption may limit the project's ability to + achieve its desired outcomes and impacts. +3. Regulatory and legal requirements: The project will need to comply + with regulatory and legal requirements related to data privacy, + security, and intellectual property. Failure to comply with these + requirements may lead to legal issues and hinder the project's + ability to achieve its desired outcomes and impacts. +4. Funding and resources: The project will require adequate funding and + resources to achieve its desired outcomes and impacts. The project + team will need to secure sufficient funding and resources to cover + the costs of software development, partnerships, and promotion. + Failure to secure adequate funding and resources may limit the + project's ability to achieve its desired outcomes and impacts. +5. Competition: The project will face competition from other social + media platforms, including big tech companies and other open-source + projects. The project team will need to differentiate the platform + and demonstrate its unique features and benefits. Failure to + differentiate the platform from its competitors may limit the + project's ability to achieve its desired outcomes and impacts. + +## + +## []{#anchor-9}2.2 Measures to maximise impact - Dissemination, exploitation and communication + +Communication and dissemination measures + +We've identified multiple dissemination measure we can apply to our +project in our plan: + +1. Developing key messages: We'll develop clear, concise, and + compelling messaging that highlight the benefits and unique features + of our project, such as the focus on **user control, privacy,** and + **data & service portability**. +2. Using multiple channels: We will be utilizing a variety of channels + to reach our target audiences outlined above, in particular through + the **Fediverse** itself, webinars, blog posts, and press releases. +3. Building partnerships: We have identified a number of partners + already like [SDEPS](https://www.sdeps.eu/) and + [PublicSpaces](https://publicspaces.net/), [Internet + Society](https://www.internetsociety.org/), + [EDRi](https://edri.org/), [GÉANT](https://geant.org/), + [RIPE](https://www.ripe.net/), [ECO](https://www.eco.de/), + [APELL](https://www.apell.info/) and [CENTR](https://www.centr.org/) + to help us reach out to our target audiences. These organizations + share our **values and mission**. +4. Present the project at conferences and events: We'll participate in + relevant conferences and events to raise awareness of our project + and engage with potential users and partners. These will include + hosting events (e.g. [Cloud Expo + Europe](https://www.cloudexpoeurope.com/), + [Cloudfest](https://www.cloudfest.com/), [Web + Summit](https://websummit.com/)) and developer events like + [FOSDEM](https://fosdem.org/), [OW2Con](https://www.ow2con.org/) and + [CCC Congress](https://events.ccc.de/) to inform a diverse audience + of the benefits of our stack and the other NGI technology solutions + we are promoting. +5. Monitoring and evaluation: We will monitor the success of our + dissemination activities and evaluate their effectiveness in + reaching and engaging ourtarget audiences. We will then use this + information to adjust and improve our strategies over time. + +Concrete examples of dissemination activities for our project will +include: + +- Creating a series of blog posts that explain the benefits of open + and decentralized social media, and how our platform addresses + common challenges faced by public organizations and NRENs. +- Hosting a webinar series that showcases the features and + functionalities of our platform, and provides tips and best + practices for using it effectively. +- Developing case studies that highlight how our platform has helped + public organizations and NRENs improve their communication and + collaboration, and sharing these case studies on social media and in + email newsletters. +- Partnering with industry associations (e.g. + [DINL](https://www.dinl.nl/), [ECO](https://www.eco.de/) and + [EuroISPA](https://www.euroispa.org/)) and advocacy groups like + [EDRi](https://edri.org/), [EFF](https://eff.org/) and + [SDEPS](https://www.sdeps.eu/) that promote open-source software and + digital rights, and working with them to promote our platform to + their members and followers. +- Participating in relevant conferences and events, such as those + focused on hosting, open-source software, digital rights, and public + sector innovation, and showcasing our platform in demos and + presentations. +- Creating a comprehensive user guide and knowledge base that provides + detailed instructions and answers to common questions about the + platform, and making this guide available on the platform's website + and Fediverse channels. + +Our communication strategies are already partially integrated in the +dissemination measure above, but we'll outline them more in depth: + +There are several communication strategies and measures that we will +utilize during the whole lifespan of the project: + +1. Developing a project website: A project website will serve as a + central hub of information about our project. It will be used to + share updates, news, publications, and other project-related + information. The website will be designed to be accessible and + user-friendly. +2. Using social media: We will reach out to Fediverse channels (e.g. + Mastodon, Pixelfed, Peertube and Owncast) as well as legacy social + media platforms such as Twitter, LinkedIn, and Facebook will be used + to reach a wider audience and share project-related news and + updates. Social media are used to engage with stakeholders and + respond to their queries and feedback. While we want to draw people + away from these closed social media environments, we'll still need + to utilize these platform for spreading our message initially. +3. Organizing workshops and events: Workshops and events will be used + to engage with stakeholders and share project-related information. + Workshops will be used to share technical knowledge, while events + will be used to showcase the project's outputs and outcomes. +4. Publishing project-related articles: Publishing project-related + articles in mainstream media publications and through the channels + of our partners will help to promote the project and its outcomes. + It will also help to raise awareness among stakeholders and + potential users of the project. +5. Developing communication materials: Developing communication + materials such as videos, podcasts and infographics will help to + make it easy to communicate about the project and its outcomes. + We'll make sure our communication materials will be designed to be + visually appealing and easy to understand. +6. Engaging with the media: Engaging with the traditional media will + help to promote the project and its outcomes. Partners like + [SDEPS](https://www.sdeps.eu/) consist of mainstream media actors + across Europe who are aligned with our mission and are themselves + potential users and ambassadors of the tools we build. + +Exploitation measures per target audience: + +1\. Public Organisations: + +- Develop and offer training sessions and workshops for public + organisations, showcasing the features and benefits of the platform + and how it can be used to increase public engagement and + participation. +- Develop case studies or success stories featuring public + organisations that have successfully implemented the platform, + highlighting the benefits they have experienced in terms of + increased citizen engagement and improved communication. +- Partner with industry associations and conferences to increase + visibility and reach among public sector decision-makers and + influencers. + +2\. NRENs: + +- Partner with NRENs to offer the platform as a service to their + clients, either as a value-added service or as part of their + existing offerings. +- Develop and offer training sessions and workshops for NRENs, + showcasing the features and benefits of the platform and how it can + be integrated into their existing services and offerings. +- Develop case studies or success stories featuring NRENs that have + successfully integrated the platform into their services, + highlighting the benefits they have experienced in terms of + increased customer satisfaction and improved service offerings. + +3\. Educational Institutions: + +- Develop and offer training sessions and workshops for educational + institutions, showcasing the features and benefits of the platform + and how it can be used to increase student engagement and + collaboration. +- Develop case studies or success stories featuring educational + institutions that have successfully implemented the platform, + highlighting the benefits they have experienced in terms of + increased student engagement and improved communication. +- Partner with educational conferences and associations to increase + visibility and reach among educational decision-makers and + influencers. + +Feedback for policy measures + +As an open and decentralized social media platform, the project has the +potential to generate feedback to policy measures related to digital +communication, privacy, and data protection. By promoting a federated +approach to social media and communication, the project will offer an +alternative to closed ecosystems controlled by big tech companies. The +following are some ways in which the project will contribute to +designing, monitoring, reviewing, and rectifying existing policy +measures or shaping and supporting the implementation of new policy +initiatives and decisions: + +1. Providing a platform for public dialogue and participation: The + project will serve as a platform for public dialogue and + participation, allowing citizens to voice their opinions and + concerns on policy measures related to digital communication, + privacy, and data protection. This feedback will inform the design, + monitoring, and review of existing policy measures or shape the + implementation of new policy initiatives and decisions. +2. Demonstrating the feasibility of an open and decentralized approach: + The project will demonstrate the feasibility of an open and + decentralized approach to social media and communication, providing + evidence for the effectiveness of such an approach in promoting user + control, privacy, and data portability. This evidence will be used + to inform policy measures related to digital communication and + encourage the adoption of a federated approach. +3. Highlighting the limitations of current policy measures: The project + will highlight the limitations of current policy measures related to + digital communication, privacy, and data protection. By showcasing + the benefits of an open and decentralized approach, the project will + draw attention to the shortcomings of existing policies and + stimulate discussions on potential improvements. +4. Providing data and analysis for policy evaluation: The project will + provide data and analysis on the use and impact of the platform, + including user engagement, user satisfaction, and data portability. + This data will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of existing + policy measures or inform the design of new policies. +5. Engaging with policymakers and stakeholders: The project will engage + with policymakers and stakeholders, including public organizations, + NRENs, and educational institutions, to raise awareness of the + platform and its potential impact on policy measures related to + digital communication, privacy, and data protection. This engagement + will facilitate collaboration and information sharing between the + project and relevant policy stakeholders, promoting mutual learning + and understanding. + +Project content and handling of intellectual property risks + +NGI as a whole operates according to open source principles and +unencumbered (royalty-free) licensing, to ensure **broad and lasting +impact**. The societal benefit of the initiative lies in the +collaborative development of technology as **commons**. This +*democratises* development and creates a *level playing field* for all. +The [vision of the NGI initiative](https://nlnet.nl/NGI/vision), +embraces the mantra '[public money, public +code](https://publiccode.eu/)'. + +**IPR directly produced by the consortium** -- The Fediversity +consortium consists of mature 'open' organisations, for which publishing +all knowledge as reusable open content and free access publications is +the norm. We offer all our own outcomes as a no-cost download, without +any user tracking. Any scientific publication will be published either +'gold level' or 'green level' **open access**. + +**Project level IPR** -- Ownership of all (third party) project content +and IPR developed through the Open Calls remains with the third parties +executing technical R&D efforts. In order to ensure lasting impact, a +**clear open source IPR regime** is therefore in place: all software, +hardware and content funded through this programme should always be made +available under a recognised libre/open license. Active and pending +patents need to be explicitly declared in the application, proposals +which have a direct and essential dependency on non-defensive patents +are not eligible for grants. NDAs are not acceptable. + +We follow the [Reuse.Software](https://reuse.software/) specification, +which is the **leading set of best practices** on copyright handling. We +willactively support our projects with achieving **copyright +compliance**, as an unclear licensing situations significantly hampers +uptake. Through the NGI0 review project (also ran by NLnet Foundation) +we will advise and help people to set up proper **IPR governance** for +their projects, including **trademarks**. + +Work in most **standards setting** organisations is automatically +covered by a **strict IPR policy**, requiring full declaration -- which +is typically followed by an effort to work around any patents in order +to create a FOSS-friendly, unencumbered standard. + +Handling the threat of software patents + +The fact that patented technologies are out of scope for our research, +does not mean that patents have ceased to be, and no longer pose a +threat. Our projects work out in the open, and so groundbreaking ideas +can be appropriated easily. We are mindful of the threat of so called +'patent trolls' or 'Non-Practising Entities' - especially since the +amount of utility patent applications continues to rise. Last year, tens +of thousands of patents on basic technologies like data processing were +issued, according to the Patent Quality Initiative. It is in the +interest of the entire community to help new ideas that come up to be +protected against software patent threats. + +Through NLnet we partner with several key stakeholders in the +intellectual property community to make sure that we handle these +threats in the best possible way. Through so called technical disclosure +commons, which are endorsed by the USPTO as an IP rights management +tool, derivative patent hijacking can be prevented. Defensive +publications are documents that provide descriptions and artwork of a +product, device or method so that it enters the public domain and +becomes time-stamped "prior art". + +This powerful preemptive disclosure prevents malicious parties from +obtaining a patent on the product, device or method. In collaboration +with our partners Open Invention Network, defensivepublications.org and +LOT we intend to make sure that there are no patent hijacks along the +way. We will integrate that aspect into the high level process on a best +effort basis. + +## + +## []{#anchor-10}2.3 Summary + ++----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+ +| Specific needs | Expected results | Communication and | +| | | dissemination | +| What are the | What does | measures | +| specific needs that | Fediversity expect | | +| triggered this | to generate by the | What dissemination, | +| project? | end of the project? | exploitation and | +| | | communication | +| | | measures will | +| | | Fediversity apply to | +| | | the results? | ++----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+ +| Availability of | Easier and | Outreach towards | +| content in the | predictable use of | main stream | +| Fediverse: | NGI-supported open | consumers: | +| | source software: | | +| Even though the | | Press and guerrilla | +| fediverse is now | We aim to provide | marketing, tech | +| used by a lot of | hosting providers | talks and webinars, | +| 'normal users' most | and public | decentralised social | +| public organizations | organizations with a | media, project | +| are lacking from | cookbook/script that | speaker bureau. | +| providing content to | will allow them to | | +| the Fediverse. | implement, and | | +| | maintain | | +| | NGI-supported open | | +| | source software in | | +| | such a way that it | | +| | feels comfortable | | +| | for IT staff to do. | | ++----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+ +| Use of open source | Better and more | Engage with | +| software is hard: | content in the | technical, | +| | Fediverse: | operational | +| The general | | | +| misconception is | by getting better | community and | +| that the use of open | support of IT staff | decision makers: | +| source software is | in running | | +| hard and it is | NGI-supported | Webinars for | +| difficult for large | fediverse platforms | 'families' of | +| organizations (both | we expect NRENs and | projects to showcase | +| public and private) | other public | progress to internet | +| to run, and maintain | organizations to | service providers, | +| open source | move to an 'open | research networks, | +| software. | first' approach for | operator groups, | +| | sharing their | hosters, CERTs, etc. | +| | content, moving away | | +| | from Big Tech. A | | +| | secondary effect of | | +| | this could be that | | +| | due to the | | +| | availability of that | | +| | content more people | | +| | would start using | | +| | the Fediverse giving | | +| | meaning to the term | | +| | 'network effect'. | | ++----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+ +| Service portability | Basic level of | Make project results | +| is lacking: | service portability: | discoverable: | +| | | | +| Even though there | We expect to get | One stop shop portal | +| are now regulations | several projects to | to browse through | +| that state that you | create a way to | different categories | +| can get all your | actually export both | of projects and | +| personal data from | data and settings so | discover new | +| service providers. | you can not only | technologies of | +| It is still quite | move to another | interest. | +| hard to move from | service provider, | | +| one platform to | but also do so | | +| another. With the | transparantly. | | +| event of federated | | | +| networks you can | | | +| export your data | | | +| from one instance | | | +| and move to another. | | | +| This is not easy and | | | +| requires quite some | | | +| work. | | | ++----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+ +| | | Engage European SMEs | +| | | and investors: | +| | | | +| | | Create a competitive | +| | | alternative economy | +| | | based on open source | +| | | with convenience and | +| | | value-add services. | ++----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+ + ++----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+ +| Target groups | Outcomes | Impacts | +| | | | +| Who will use or | What change does | What are the | +| further up-take the | Fediversity expect | expected wider | +| results of the | to see after | scientific, economic | +| project? Who will | successful | and societal effects | +| benefit from the | dissemination and | of the projects | +| results of the | exploitation of | contributing to the | +| project? | project results to | expected impacts | +| | the target groups? | outlined in the | +| | | respective | +| | | destination in the | +| | | work programme? | ++----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+ +| Software and | Significant uptake | Societal: | +| hardware companies | by interested users: | | +| and in-house | | Sustainable | +| developers: | Projects improve the | ecosystem around | +| | state of the art and | open source and open | +| Developers (also | can be customised, | hardware projects | +| in-house) from | offering distinct | which creates a | +| public and private | advantages over | virtuous cycle of | +| sector that benefit | existing | collaboration, | +| from quality | (proprietary or | growth and | +| reusable components | legacy) tools. | innovation. | +| and turnkey best | | | +| practices. | | | ++----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+ +| Regular end users: | Adoption by service | Societal: | +| | providers, network | | +| Many technologies | operators and | Privacy and security | +| within NGI Zero | platforms: | improvements help | +| directly benefit | | users avoid risks, | +| those that want to | Efforts within the | especially important | +| increase their | infrastructure and | for vulnerable | +| online privacy, | hosting layer, and | groups like | +| independence and | at the level of | minorities, | +| security. | platforms and | whistle-blowers, | +| | distributions will | activists, refugees | +| | 'automatically' | and journalists. | +| | benefit users. | | ++----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+ +| Enterprises and | Integration of | **Economic:** | +| public sector: | project output into | | +| | major open source | ISPs, hosters, | +| Organisations can | solutions: | network operators, | +| replace proprietary, | | companies and civil | +| possibly unethical | Superior solutions | society (re)use | +| business software | tend to gradually | project output to | +| with open source, | replace legacy | deliver services | +| user-respecting | technologies and | that grant users | +| solutions. | improving standards | more autonomy and | +| | has a strong effect | privacy. | +| | on the overall | | +| | marketplace. | | ++----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+ +| Academia and | **Usage and (paid) | **Economic:** | +| research: | services for | | +| | enterprises and | We expect a new | +| Unlike proprietary | organisations:** | economy will start | +| ("black box") tools | | to evolve based on | +| and services, open | On top of state of | value added support | +| source solutions are | the art FOSS | and services for | +| well-suited for | solutions everyone | e.g. end-to-end | +| academics and | can build | communication, | +| private and public | competitive business | private data | +| sector research as a | and services. | storage, federated | +| subject and to | | and decentralised | +| experiment with new | | identity management. | +| ideas. | | | ++----------------------+----------------------+----------------------+ + +# []{#anchor-11}3 Quality and efficiency of the implementation + +## []{#anchor-12}3.1 Work plan and resources + +Table 3.1g: Subcontracting costs + +Not applicable. + +Table 3.1h: Purchase costs + ++------------------+------------------+----------+------------------+ +| Description | Category | Cost (€) | Justification | ++------------------+------------------+----------+------------------+ +| Test hardware | Other goods, | 200.000 | For our UX | +| | works and | | research we need | +| | services | | to acquire a | +| | | | reasonable | +| | | | diverse set of | +| | | | tablets, PC\'s | +| | | | and mobile | +| | | | phones so that | +| | | | we can support | +| | | | actually used | +| | | | devices. This is | +| | | | essential to | +| | | | deliver the kind | +| | | | of support | +| | | | people expect | +| | | | from software in | +| | | | general, but | +| | | | cloud services | +| | | | (like our social | +| | | | networking | +| | | | products from | +| | | | the NGI | +| | | | technologies we | +| | | | choose). We want | +| | | | to create a test | +| | | | lab that is also | +| | | | accessible to | +| | | | the chosen | +| | | | technology | +| | | | developers at | +| | | | request. We will | +| | | | at least need to | +| | | | acquire the | +| | | | latest new | +| | | | models of | +| | | | popular phones | +| | | | and tablets | +| | | | other devices | +| | | | every 3 months | +| | | | (estimated total | +| | | | of 60 devices by | +| | | | the end of the | +| | | | project) and new | +| | | | models of | +| | | | laptops, | +| | | | chromebooks and | +| | | | the likes every | +| | | | 6 months | +| | | | (estimated total | +| | | | of 30 devices by | +| | | | the end of the | +| | | | project) and a | +| | | | few PC's with | +| | | | various | +| | | | form-factors and | +| | | | operating | +| | | | systems | +| | | | (estimated total | +| | | | of 24 devices by | +| | | | the end of the | +| | | | project). We | +| | | | expect to be | +| | | | using about | +| | | | 50.000 of the | +| | | | budget for this. | +| | | | | +| | | | Another | +| | | | substantial part | +| | | | will be used for | +| | | | a test-setup | +| | | | \'at scale\' for | +| | | | running the | +| | | | actual services: | +| | | | server-hardware, | +| | | | netw | +| | | | orking-hardware, | +| | | | storage-systems. | +| | | | Also we need to | +| | | | account for | +| | | | hosting and | +| | | | networking-costs | +| | | | in dual | +| | | | locations. | +| | | | | +| | | | We will acquire | +| | | | about 80 | +| | | | server-systems, | +| | | | 12 | +| | | | storage-systems, | +| | | | and some | +| | | | networking | +| | | | equipment housed | +| | | | in two | +| | | | locations. All | +| | | | hardware will be | +| | | | second-hand as | +| | | | to keep cost | +| | | | low. | +| | | | | +| | | | For this we | +| | | | expect to be | +| | | | using about | +| | | | 130.000 of the | +| | | | budget. | +| | | | | +| | | | The remaining | +| | | | 20.000 euro we | +| | | | want to spend on | +| | | | two or four | +| | | | openhardware | +| | | | servers based on | +| | | | OpenPower to run | +| | | | a small pilot as | +| | | | part of the | +| | | | test/development | +| | | | setup to see | +| | | | where it makes | +| | | | sense to use | +| | | | OpenHardware in | +| | | | the setup for | +| | | | running | +| | | | Fediverse | +| | | | software. | ++------------------+------------------+----------+------------------+ +| Remaining | | 10.000 | Is for promotion | +| purchase costs | | | and marketing | +| | | | material like | +| | | | stickers, | +| | | | banners, and | +| | | | other | +| | | | promotional | +| | | | material to hand | +| | | | out on each and | +| | | | every event we | +| | | | will visit. | ++------------------+------------------+----------+------------------+ +| Travel and | | 15.000 | Will be used for | +| subsistence | | | traveling | +| | | | between the | +| | | | Netherlands, the | +| | | | Nordics, France | +| | | | and the rest of | +| | | | Europe for | +| | | | attending | +| | | | conferences and | +| | | | other meetups. | ++------------------+------------------+----------+------------------+ +| Total | | 225.000 | | ++------------------+------------------+----------+------------------+ + +Table 3.1.i: Other costs categories + +Not applicable. + +Table 3.1.j: 'In-kind contributions' provided by third parties + +Not applicable. + +## []{#anchor-13}3.2 Capacity of participants and consortium as a whole + +Fediversity is a unique collaboration of not-for-profit internet expert +organisations with a strong track record: + +[**Open Internet Discourse Foundation**](https://oid.foundation/)** +(coordinator -- OID)** is the result of 22 years of work in the Open +Source internet market. A company called ProcoliX founded with roots in +hosting services that date back to the early stages of the internet. +Today hosting public services like the NLUUG FTP server, one of the +largest repositories of Open Source software in Europe and sites like +Mastodon.nl and Petities.nl for the public good. OID has a 'open source +only' approach to running Internet IT Infrastructure. + +[NLnet Foundation](https://nlnet.nl/) (NLnet -- NL) \~ Widely recognised +as one of the leading grantmakers in the realm of internet and open +technology. Introduced the internet in Europe in the eighties, and led +the project that defined the vision of the NGI initiative. Now is the +driving force behind NGI Zero, and responsible for over half of the +active projects inside NGI. + +[Tweag](https://tweag.io/) \~ Tweag is a software innovation lab that +helps deep tech startups quickly scale their engineering performance and +execute on high-risk, high-reward projects with confidence. Tweag's team +of engineers are behind today's boldest innovations in machine learning, +distributed computing and biotech. Applying mathematics, computer +science and the methods of open source to software engineering, Tweag +stretches what's possible for clients. + +[NORDUnet](https://nordu.net/) \~ NORDUnet is an international +collaboration between the National research and education networks in +the Nordic countries. NORDUnet interconnects the Nordic national +research and education networks and connects them to the worldwide +network for research and education and to the general purpose Internet. +NORDUnet provides its services by a combination of leased lines and +Internet services provided by other international operators. NORDUnet +has peering in multiple important internet exchange sites outside the +Nordics, such as Amsterdam, Chicago, Frankfurt, London, Miami and New +York. + +# []{#anchor-14}4 Ethics self-assessment + +**Human embryonic stem cells and human embryos** + +- Does this activity involve Human Embryonic Stem Cells (hESCs)? + **NO** +- Does this activity involve the use of human embryos? **NO** +- Does your activity involve the use of other human embryonic or + foetal tisses/cells? **NO** + +Humans + +- Does your activity involve human participants? **NO** +- Does your activity involve interventions (physical also including + imaging technology, behavioural treatments, tracking and tracing, + etc.) on the study participants?' **NO** +- Does this activity involve conducting a clinical study as defined by + the Clinical Trial Regulation (EU 536/2014)? (using pharmaceuticals, + biologicals, radiopharmaceuticals, or advanced therapy medicinal + products) **NO** + +Human cells / tissues + +- Does your activity involve the use of human cells or tissues (other + than those covered by section 1)? **NO** + +Personal data + +- Does this activity involve processing of personal data? **NO** +- Does this activity involve further processing of previously + collected personal data (including use of preexisting data sets or + sources, merging existing data sets)? **NO** +- Is it planned to export personal data from the EU to non-EU + countries? **NO** +- Is it planned to import personal data from non-EU countries into the + EU or from a non-EU country to another non-EU country? **NO** +- Does this activity involve the processing of personal data related + to criminal convictions or offences? **NO** + +Animals + +- Does this activity involve animals? **NO** + +Non-EU countries + +- Will some of the activities be carried out in non-EU countries? + **YES (potentially) **\ + **\*Specify the countries involved\***: The countries from which + beneficiaries operate are not yet known (open call involving + financial support to third parties). +- In case non-EU countries are involved, do the activities undertaken + in these countries raise potential ethics issues? **NO** +- Is it planned to use local resources (e.g. animal and/or human + tissue samples, genetic material, live animals, human remains, + materials of historical value, endangered fauna or flora samples, + etc.)? **NO** +- Is it planned to import any material (other than data) from non-EU + countries into the EU or from a non-EU country to another non-EU + country? (For data imports, see section 4. For imports of human + cells or tissues, see section 3.) **NO**\ + Is it planned to export any material (other than data) from the EU + to non-EU countries? For data exports, see section 4. **NO** +- Does this activity involves low and/or lower-middle income + countries? (if yes, detail the benefit-sharing actions planned in + the self-assessment) **NO** +- Could the situation in the country put the individuals taking part + in the activity at risk? **NO** + +Environment & health and safety + +- Does this activity involve the use of substances or processes (or + technologies) that may cause harm to the environment, to animals or + plants (during the implementation of the activity or further to the + use of the results, as a possible impact)?** NO** +- Does this activity deal with endangered fauna and/or flora / + protected areas?** NO** +- Does this activity involve the use of substances or processes (or + technologies) that may cause harm to humans, including those + performing the activity (during the implementation of the activity + or further to the use of the results, or the deployment of the + technology as a possible impact)?** NO** + +Artificial intelligence + +- Does this activity involve the development, deployment and/or use of + Artificial Intelligence-based systems?** NO**\ + +Other ethics issues + +- Are there any other ethics issues that should be taken into + consideration?** NO**\ + \ + \[x\] I confirm that I have taken into account all ethics issues + above and that, if any ethics issues apply, I will complete the + ethics self-assessment as described in the guidance \'How to + complete your Ethics Self-Assessment\'. (See Guide 4 section 5) + +# []{#anchor-15}5. Financial support to third parties in Fediversity + +Financial support in the form of a grant awarded after a call for +proposals + +As detailed in Part B, Fediversity in addition to its research goals and +support for verticals will contribute 15% of its budget to the +development of related digital commons through financial support in the +form of grants awarded to third parties through bi-monthly open calls +for proposals. + +In this annexe we describe the following aspects of this financial +support by detailing our approach to managing a dedicated fund +supporting a series of open calls related to Fediversity: + +- Objectives and results obtained of third party financial support +- Specifications of third party financial support +- List of activities and costs eligible for funding +- Definition of persons or categories of persons which may receive + financial support +- Criteria for awarding financial support +- Criteria for calculating the exact amount of the financial support + +Objectives and results obtained of third party financial support + +The **core objective** of the grant component of the Fediversity +programme is to fund and support independent researchers and developers +and organisations that contribute open source technology for a more +open, trustworthy internet *pertinent to the NGI technologies further +developed within Fediversity*. + +The way we do this is a **tailormade** version of the open call grant +mechanism which -- through acclaimed programmes like [NGI +Zero](https://nlnet.nl/NGI0) and [NGI Assure](https://nlnet.nl/assure) +-- has already been responsible for most of the projects within NGI: the +open call operated by NLnet foundation -- including +[Mastodon](https://nlnet.nl/project/Mastodon), +[PixelFed](https://nlnet.nl/project/PixelFed) and +[PeerTube](https://nlnet.nl/project/PeerTube). + +NLnet is the oldest internet technology grantmaker in Europe, and has +decades of track record in funding strategic efforts. We will open a +**dedicated fund** for the calls from the Fediversity Pilot. + +As a recognised public benefit organisation NLnet operates +*transparently*, is *publicly accountable* and the goals of the topic in +the Work Programme align with its *statutory mission*. Any grants that +will be handed out to individuals, companies, NGO's or other types of +legal entities are donations that fall under the most beneficial tax +conditions as '[philanthropic +gifts](https://philea.eu/philanthropy-in-europe/policy-and-advocacy/analysing-the-legal-environment-for-philanthropy-in-europe/)'. + +The **results** of the *Fediversity grant programme* consist of new or +improved **digital commons** that have a clear link to its research +topics and contribute to the public benefit. These characteristics are +requirements for projects to be selected and funded, and stem from the +overal vision that underpins the Next Generation Internet initiative. + +Specifications of third party financial support + +We will competitively award 450 000 EUR worth of grants to third +parties. This is 15% of the Fediversity budget. Fueling great R&D is the +core objective of this Innovation Action. We have detailed the list of +activities that qualify for financial support, the entire procedure, the +results to be obtained, who is eligible, the competitive criteria for +awarding financial support, and the criteria for calculating the exact +amount of the financial support (competitive, best value delivered) +below. + +**List of activities and costs eligible for funding** + +The following types of activities qualify for financial support, +provided they are cost effective and have a clear link to the topics +directly relevant to Fediversity and the objectives set out in the work +programme/call: + +- Primary ring: Fediversity makes intensive use of NixOS for the + hostingstack. Projects that improve, enhance or add to this stack. +- Secondary ring: applications that can be added to the Fediversity + stack. +- Tertiary ring: tools or applications that enable provisioning, + monitoring, authentication, etc. for the Fediversity stack. +- Understanding user requirements and improving usability/inclusive + design. +- Necessary measures in support of (broad)er deployability, e.g. + packaging. +- Participation in technical, developer and community events like + hackathons, IETF, W3C, RIPE meetings, FOSDEM, etc. (admission fee, + travel and subsistence costs). +- Other activities that are relevant to adhering to robust software + development and deployment practices. +- Project management. +- Out-of-pocket costs for infrastructure essential to achieving the + above. + +Definition of persons or categories of persons which may receive +financial support + +There are no categorical exclusions of persons who may not receive +support from Fediversity. + +Given equal proposals, inhabitants of the EU and its associated +countries are given priority, however if the project is of exceptional +quality and the proposer holds unique technical expertise proposals from +outside of those geographic areas can be eligible as well. + +Young people that have not yet reached the age of legal consent in their +country of origin (typically 18 years old) on the date of the deadline +may apply without any constraints; consent from a legal guardian such as +a parent does not have to be provided prior to initial submission, but +will be required to enter any further negotiations. + +Special efforts are made to reach out to talent from under-represented +parts of the community. + +Criteria for awarding financial support + +Projects are judged on their **technical merits, strategic relevance** +to the Next Generation Internet and overall **value for money**. The key +objective is to deliver potential break-through contributions to the +open internet linked to the NGI technologies which are the topic of +Fediversity. All scientific outcomes must be published as open access, +and any software and hardware must be published under a recognised free +and open source license in its entirety. + +The proposed IPR regime is in line with the approach in other NGI +programmes such as NGI Zero and is 100% compatible with the vision of +the Next Generation Internet initiative. It ensures **lasting impact** +and **reusability of results**. + +Payment is upon delivery, which is fair. However, should during the +executing of a project the beneficiaries face any major hardships +without having a financial safety net -- including being struck by +natural disaster, serious personal medical crisis or other disruptive +life events that prevent them from timely completion of the project and +subsequent entitlement to a donation -- they may upon providing proof of +the circumstances be granted a proportional amount as hardship +contribution. + +First stage assessment Based on the submitted proposals, projects +receive a first check for eligibility in terms of alignment of goals and +criteria with the sub-granting call. In this stage hard eligibility +("knock-out") criteria specific to the sub-granting call are checked. +Project proposals are written in English and: + +- should be in line with the NGI vision and the sub-granting call + applied for +- should have research and development as their primary objective +- should satisfy any other hard eligibility criteria specific to the + sub-granting call, such as geographic limitations + +All projects that fail on any of these knock-out criteria, will not be +further reviewed and will be marked ineligible. The rest of the projects +will be given a score based on the proposal text as submitted. + +Projects receive an initial rating on three criteria: + + -------- -------------------------------------- + Weight Criterion + 30% Technical excellence/feasibility + 40% Relevance/Impact/Strategic potential + 30% Cost effectiveness/Value for money + -------- -------------------------------------- + +The total weighted score of projects has to be above 5 (out of 7) to +pass to the next stage. + +The projects which are not taken into the second round are informed that +their project is not selected, so that they may try to find funding +elsewhere as soon as possible - or continue without additional funding +(as happens a lot). + +**Second stage assessment** The second stage is used to select strategic +projects which not only satisfy the minimal criteria, but also have +potentially a lasting impact on society. Projects are to be selected +based on their potential contribution to the Next Generation Internet +and its key drivers for change. In the second stage, the reviewers are +able to ask additional clarifying questions and make (minor) suggestions +to improve the quality and impact of the project. + +This typically involves questions such as: + +- what is the difference in approach to existing projects U, V and W +- how will you approach complicating factor X +- can you back up or validate claim Y +- have you considered collaborating with complementary effort Z or + using standard A +- the rate you have applied for task B is very high compared to the + perceived value of that task. Can you explain, or would you like to + reconsider? +- can you clarify how you intend to make the outcome of the project + (self)sustainable +- how does upstream project D feel about your application + +In addition, the review team will do independent verification of facts, +methods and claims. If necessary they verify relevant information +through their expert network. This is done without revealing personally +identifiable information, unless there is explicit consent from the +submitter that their project may be shared. The second stage typically +lasts two-three weeks. If a project is unable to prepare all the answers +to the questions and/or a modified proposal within the allocated time +frame, the project may be moved to the next round. Note that the +proposed project budget may change during this phase due to added or +deleted project milestones. + +After the second stage is completed, new ratings are calculated based on +the revised plan. If the revised plan scores lower than the original +proposal, the original proposal is rated. Projects are subsequently +ranked by the team according to the overall expected value and impact to +the NGI initiative. A cut off point is determined, based on the overall +quality of the round and the remaining budget. The projects that fall +below the cut are (similar to the first round) informed that their +project is not selected, so that they may try to find funding elsewhere +as soon as possible - or continue without additional funding. + +**Third stage: Independent review committee** An independent review +committee checks the final selection of projects. The review committee +consists of independent experts from the internet and FOSS community, +academia and the public sector. The committee receives no remuneration +for its work, and its members have no other economic interests with NGI +and/or links to NLnet Foundation as the grant-making organisation. Each +project is reviewed for eligibility independently by at least two +members of the review committee. + +The outcome of the selection process is randomly divided among the +members of the Review Committee. The committee validates that all the +projects that are nominated are indeed eligible for funding, budgets are +frugal, and that there are no other concerns. This creates a +transparency trail with regards to eligibility and cost effectiveness of +the proposed solutions, while retaining confidentiality of the preceding +procedure. If a project fails to meet the criteria of the independent +review committee, the concerns are sent to the proposer and the project +is pushed back to the next available call. If there is no future call, +the project is declined. + +The external review board does not have to review amendments to an +already granted project in case of: + +- changes in the composition of the project team +- adjustments of a project plan without budget changes +- additional tasks within the same scope and using equivalent rates, + as long as the total grant amount stays below 60k euro + +Criteria for calculating the exact amount of the financial support + +The call text stipulates that subgrants between 10k and 50k euro are the +expected target range. + +Our long term of experience with precisely this type of funding +instrument has learned us that there is already benefit below this scale +-- and in fact being able to offer more modest amounts actually invites +a different (but very interesting) group of contributors that would +consider those higher amounts above their capacity. We therefore allow +even smaller project to apply, setting the bandwidth for proposals +between **5 000** and **50 000 euro**. Obviously, this comes with +additional overhead at our end -- but we believe that to be worth it. + +The amount to be granted to each third party should be the amount +**necessary to achieve the key objectives** of the action. During the +three stage review process, the overall 'value for money' and strategic +potential of the proposal are part of the review, and thus of the +ranking. + +We have a rapid succession of project funding opportunities, so we can +**iterate** and **grow** talent instead of having a 'leap of faith' with +a select few projects. Excellent teams that have successfully completed +their project, can apply for additional funding again -- provided that +higher amount is necessary and delivers enough additional value. They +are judged along the same criteria as the rest of the people in the +grant round they are entering. + +Proposals must adhere to the following boundary conditions: + +- a single proposal MAY request a grant allocation up to 50k euro. +- a significant part of the work within a project MUST have been + successfully completed before an amendment to the project or a new + propoposal from the same applicant can be awarded: this means that + the project deliverables have been made publicly available under + recognised open/free licenses, that any software artefacts delivered + were WCAG compliant, and that the outcomes of any third party audit + have been satisfactorily dealt with. +- If a grantee seeks an amendment or new grant, the outcomes of the + previously delivered work are taken into account during the + evaluation. + +The exact amount of financial support is determined by NLnet based on +the projected cost and estimated value of the proposition. Any proposed +amount is to be adjusted for costs that are deemed ineligible (see +above) as well as for the cost of any additional activities recommended +by NLnet. The final amount is established in the memorandum of +understanding between NLnet and the grantee. If the grantee does not +agree with the size of the grant offered, they may decline and withdraw +the proposal prior to signing the MoU at any time. + +NLnet as the grant handling organisation is a [recognised public benefit +organisation](https://nlnet.nl/foundation/ANBI.html), and the goals of +NGI are within its [statutory +mission](https://nlnet.nl/foundation/20070322-statuten.pdf). Any grants +that will be handed out, to individuals, companies, NGO's or other types +of legal entities are donations that fall under the most beneficial tax +conditions as 'charitable gifts'. + +Maximum amount to be granted to each third party + +The maximum amount to be granted per third party over the lifetime of +Fediversity is 60k euro. A third party can be a formal organisation (of +any type) or an individual. + +Confidentiality and privacy + +We take confidentiality of information conveyed to us, and the privacy +of our applicants and grantees very serious. We have minimised the +amount of information requested during the application, and until the +point where the actual grant process starts applicants can remain +anonymous at their own discretion. In our privacy policy we inform +potential applicants that they can use an alias and a temporary email +address, and upon sharing a valid public OpenPGP key we will use OpenPGP +to encrypt any further communication. As long as a project is not +accepted, the applicants real identity is not relevant to us. If the +proposal never goes beyond that phase they can remain anonymous. + +In order to review and process project proposals we need to grant access +to the professional staff of NLnet foundation responsible for reviewing +and running the open calls associated with Fediversity (WP4). Since +confidentiality is a critical aspect of the trust relationship we have +with projects, at no point in time will proposals be shared with third +parties without explicity permission, not even partners within +Fediversity. Sometimes opportunities will arise outside of the context +of this fund, or there is a potential to support the project in some +other way. At the time of submitting the proposal applicants either +grant NLnet Foundation the right to keep any information submitted on +record -- should future funding opportunities arise -- or not. When the +latter option is selected, NLnet will remove the information associated +with the proposal if it is not successful. If they chose to allow NLnet +to keep the information at hand, NLnet may at some point in the future +bring them into contact with others at any given point inthe future -- +but again only after explicit written consent from applicants. + +When a project makes it through the first two stages of the selection +process (see above), we need to share some information with the +independent Review Committee -- which consists of a small group of +trusted experts. We do not pass on names of individuals (nor their +contact details) onto the committee, but the committee members do +receive and evaluate the granted proposal in a confidential manner. + +When a proposal makes it through the third round and goes into the +grantmaking process, we legally need to retain the applicants +information for compliance purposes for at least seven years. We share +contact details with our (not-for-profit) partner organisations in order +so they may assist the projects with mentoring and technical advice. + +NLnet is also the coordinator of NGI Zero Review, through which projects +may receive complementary services e.g. accessibility audits, +localisation support, packaging, security reviews etc. Supporting +organisations within Fediversity do need to actually contact people in +order to support or mentor them, NLnet will ask grantees to allow them +to make contact information available to these partners -- but we do not +necessarily reveal their real identity. Applicants may provide us with +an alias which will be what we expose to partners instead. + +If people request a copy of their application, this is sent to the email +address they themselves provide to use. We assume people have a good +understanding of who has access to the associated mailbox and/or can +observe their mail server traffic. + +The European Commission and its appointed project review committees +receive management information about projects receiving grants from +these calls, but not the proposals themselves -- and only the initials +of the names (or aliases) of individuals are shared. + +We ask people to inform us of any additional security and privacy +constraints they have in our privacy policy, and we will try to +accommodate such constraints to the best of our abilities -- or tell +them we are not able to do so. That at least gives people the choice to +continue their interaction with us or not. + +Conflict of interest resolution + +The reviews within the Fediversity grant programme are done by full time +professional staff of a recognised and professionally audited public +benefit organisation with a significant track record (NLnet foundation), +hired to perform impartial and objective project reviews without +economic interest, political or national affinity. Every project is +reviewed by multiple full time staff members, and independently from +that all projects proposed for funding are again reviewed by multiple +well-regarded experts from academia, the internet world and the public +sector. + +Institutional conflicts of interest + +As the organisation responsible for performing the reviews within the +Fediversity grant programme, NLnet foundation offers strong guarantees +it does not in any way have any financial or other benefit from awarding +certain proposals over others. Note that NLnet foundation is entirely +independent, and has been so ever since it was founded in 1989. NLnet +currently has no organisational ties with other legal entities -- with +the noted exception of its wholly owned fiscal fundraising entity +Commons Caretakers, which for obvious reasons is excluded from +requesting grants from the Fediversity grant programme. As part of +managing its own financial endowment, NLnet has some small historical +investments in SME companies and small investment funds. Companies +financially invested in by NLnet are also explicitly excluded from +receiving any grants through Fediversity. + +Although they are not in any way involved with the review, the other +legal entities that are part of the Fediversity consortium and their +staff are also fully excluded from requesting and receiving grants +through the Fediversity grant programme. This avoids conflicts of +interest within the consortium, which was already minimal due to the +fact that NLnet is also the coordinator. + +Personal conflicts of interest + +Reviews are performed by full time professional staff, hired to perform +impartial and objective project reviews without economic interest, +political or national affinity. For obvious reasons, NLnet staff are not +allowed to have any financial or other personal benefit from grant +proposals they are responsible for reviewing in any way either -- other +than the longer term public benefit. This allows them to fulfil their +tasks in an impartial manner. The same holds for those people with which +the reviewers have close family ties (spouse, domestic or non-domestic +partner, child, sibling, parent etc.), and for any legal entities in +which NLnet (or its staff) may hold stocks, shares or other economic +rights. + +Independent review committee + +The standing review committee consisting of independent experts from the +technical and academic internet community and the public sector +validates the outcome of the selection procedure of each round on +criteria of eligibility and budgetary efficiency. To ensure their +independence, the members of the review committee are not attached to +any of the consortium partners within Fediversity as employee, member of +the board of directors or member of the board of supervisors. + +Members of the independent review committee, their employers, their +coworkers and their relatives are themselves excluded from submitting +projects to the Fediversity grant programme. + +Membership of reviewers in associations and not-for-profits + +Note that the above explicitly does allow for past and present +non-remunerate involvement of NLnet staff in not-for-profit legal +entities serving the public interest, including those that were part of +previously funded efforts within its funding programmes in which the +partners were involved. This also includes paid and unpaid (board) +membership of professional or ideological organisations such as ACM, +IEEE, Internet Society, FSF, ICANN, OSI and Unix user groups, legal +umbrellas such as The Commons Conservancy as well as open standards +bodies like OASIS and W3C. + +Submissions from those organisations (and other people involved with +them) are not considered to constitute a conflict of interest. The +'reviewer paradox' is similar to the more classical 'observer paradox': +in order to be able to properly review the relevance of proposed R&D at +the cutting edge of technology, reviewers have to have a level of +knowledge that only exists within the R&D ecosystem itself. + +We believe it would not be proportional to exclude members of +associations and volunteers within not-for-profits to exclude them from +receiving support through the Fediversity grant programme, and we +believe the ample additional quality assurances and third party checks +made within the Fediversity grant programme allow for this sane +approach. + +Non-commercial constituencies + +As mentioned before, all legal entities that are part of the Fediversity +consortium and their paid staff are excluded from requesting and +receiving grants through the Fediversity grant programme. This actively +blocks any applications from the entire paid staff from the +organisations within the consortium as well as the leadership involved +with Fediversity: there is a 'Chinese wall' between the projects which +are funded and the partners supporting the projects. + +We believe it would not be proportional and in fact be undesirable to +categorically exclude the membership and volunteer constituencies of the +not-for-profit organisations within the NGI Zero ecosystem from grants. +Besides NLnet foundation, neither of the partners is involved in any way +with the actual review of projects and the resulting selection. The fact +that people choose to contribute in an unpaid capacity to idealistic +organisations that play an active and constructive role in e.g. the +internet and open source ecosystems should not affect their ability to +receive funding for a possible contribution. The same holds for (former +and current) students and (former and non-remunerate) doctoral +candidates of the academic partners in Fediversity. In fact, the ability +to reach motivated and qualified people aligned with the core mission of +NGI is one of the reasons these organisations were involved in the first +place. + +Given the clear and consistent separation between the rest of the +consortium and the selection process, and the strong quality guarantees +from the whole procedure, NLNet and the rest of the Fediversity +consortium elected to place no restrictions on proposals from the +non-commercial constituencies surrounding the consortium partners in +Fediversity -- with of course the noted exception of the grantmaking +organisation (NLnet foundation). Consortium members have been instructed +to stay clear from project proposals from their constituencies, and are +aware that failing to keep adequate distance to proposals from their +constituencies will disqualify the proposals involved. + +# []{#anchor-16}Overview of project displayed in a Gantt chart + +[]{#anchor-17}![](Pictures/10000001000003F4000004EF79A4F3605EBA79FB.png){width="6.6929in" +height="8.3528in"} + +[^1]: For example, the EU, or the Max Planck Society are running their + own Mastodon servers. + +[^2]: services like Facebook, Instagram or Twitter + +[^3]: Meta have been reported to work on an ActivityPub based app, + Medium has adopted ActivityPub and Tumblr as well.