kiara/fedi-goals
1
0
Fork 1
Code Issues Pull requests 1 Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions
fedi-goals/fediversity.md
cinereal 457ab451a1
init
2025-05-13 10:28:21 +02:00

2231 lines
121 KiB
Markdown
Raw Blame History

[]{#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.
Reference in a new issue View git blame Copy permalink