I'm not an expert on ActivityPub nor academic publishing. What I'm trying to say is that what is built on top of the protocol has more to do with its suitability for a particular purpose than the foundational technology.
The first quote is an observation that It is unlikely that Mastodon will be a suitable drop-in-replacement for the current process.
The second quote is an observation that perhaps there is a way to use the technological pieces that are currently available for federation and apply them to the organization of scientific/academic societies. But that whole system is going to be significantly more than the federated aspect.
Part of this is I remember Google Wave and the unreasonable hype around it. It would replace email, newsgroups, instant messaging … basically all forms of text based communication! Some of the hype for these more contemporary niche technologies is even wilder, this article for example claiming it should force a complete re-think of academic publishing.
The first quote is an observation that It is unlikely that Mastodon will be a suitable drop-in-replacement for the current process.
The second quote is an observation that perhaps there is a way to use the technological pieces that are currently available for federation and apply them to the organization of scientific/academic societies. But that whole system is going to be significantly more than the federated aspect.
Part of this is I remember Google Wave and the unreasonable hype around it. It would replace email, newsgroups, instant messaging … basically all forms of text based communication! Some of the hype for these more contemporary niche technologies is even wilder, this article for example claiming it should force a complete re-think of academic publishing.