rglullis @ rglullis @communick.news

Posts

39

Comments

1,808

Joined

2 yr. ago

ok. Can I get an invite to the repo, then? :) I'm https://codeberg.org/raphael.

unless someone is truly interested in working with me on this project (...) there's really no use in sharing it.

Yeah, but doesn't it go both ways? How can people find out if their vision is aligned with yours unless you show what you have?

I mean, I share the feeling of not wanting to make any big announcement when it's not usable, but at least putting out a link to the repo and some roadmap would help others to see if they would be interested in helping you.

Any particular reason to keep it private?

You don't need a "platform", you need a Fediverse indexer + search engine.

It's Dan's whole M.O: he gets excited about some new project, goes on a rushed coding rampage, releases some alpha-quality code, then loses interest and starts the chase for the next shiny toy.

the project is unfinished

Understatement of the year. Dan has posted "loops next week" for more than an year already...

I am not sure I follow. How would a troll cause trouble to an instance by lurking on a site?

usually to prevent spam and other crazy shit

but a registration shouldn't be needed if you just want to browse and scroll.

wut?

It's not a Federated platform like LinkedIn, but I am working on CareerCupid , a "OkCupid for jobs" website where people can answer questions about their values and goals, and then find out people that are the most compatible to work with. The website does work with ActivityPub though, you can follow @thecupid@cupid.careers and you can see the new polls and job listings published on the website.

There is no such thing as a "vote" in ActivityPub/ActivityStreams. This idea of "up/down votes" is just an abstraction of a message saying "Actor A liked B", where B is an Post/Comment (and a post/comment itself just being an abstraction of ActivityStreams objects).

That is to say: there is no way to selectively hide the content a message. If you want federation to work and you want people outside your own server to see your posts, then the server needs to broadcast the messages to anyone listening.

Tools like lemvotes are just exposing this information. There is no point in trying to censor the tool, because this information is available publicly, and any motivated person will be able to track this information.

If you are concerned about what people think of your "likes" and "dislikes", then do not use a public social media service and only communicate with provably secure communication tools.

There is no upvote system. no favourites system, no saved posts system.

There is no such thing as "upvote" on ActivityPub. This is an abstraction on top of the "Like" activity. If Misskey UI is geared only towards reactions and doesn't have a way for users to "like" something, this is a Misskey problem, not a Fediverse one.

My point is, this discrepancy between platforms calls for standardized system.

And what people are trying to explain to you is that this "standardized system" already exists. ActivityStreams is the standard to define a vocabulary, and ActivityPub is the standard that defines what happens when data is sent between different servers.

The issue I am taking with your comment is that it seems that you are expecting developers to start backwards from an unified product vision and then build their way down to the standard. This only works well when you have one single entity controlling everything. It's the "Apple Way" of developing products.

So this is not a "Fediverse problem", but a Misskey one?

It looks like that first you need to be able to better articulate what do you mean "federating everywhere", because I can follow a Lemmy community from Mastodon just fine, and you seem to be on Misskey, and we are communicating just fine.

IOW, "federation" is already working.

Perhaps you just mean that you want the UX from misskey to change depending on the source? And you are proposing that this should be done to all software?

Implementing communities for every platform would help the Fediverse

From Evan Prodromou, co-author of ActivityPub: The Fediverse should be more like the Facebook Platform (lots of client apps using the same social graph) rather than the Apple App Store (a bunch of one-feature apps that have to bootstrap their own social network each time).

The issue here is that most developers and users are still thinking in terms of the siloed networks. We don't need "multiple, separate platforms". We need to get rid of the platforms! We need to build our tools around protocols.

The WWW was incredibly successful because anyone could whip up some HTML and publish a webpage. The "protocol" of structured text alongside with links was simple to understand, any browser could do it. The Social Web should work the same.

You see, this is why it's important to understand that how ActivityPub works and why we can not think only in terms of "Reddit, but federated".

In terms of ActivityPub, a community that mirrors posts is exactly the same as someone that "retweets" a message. You may not even have realized, but it's quite possible that your posts/comments have been replicated on mastodon. Now that they are (finally) adding support for quote-posts, this will be even more common.

What I just described to you is this "communities following communities" idea. It's not about "giving the impression" of anything, it would be openly to aggregate all content in one single place and to avoid fragmentation.

Now, like I said in the linked discussion, I think that there is a legitimate complaint about taking content from one place and just moving it around. But at least the approach I am proposing is not fabricating anything. It's Piefed's implementation that is falsifying information. In my view, what PieFed is doing is objectively worse than a "reposting actor". Just like the "private voting" feature, it is beneficial for its own users but it's bad for the overall Fediverse.

I mean you could just copy my posts anyway manually,

No, no. By mirroring, I mean it is possible to make it look like you posted to the community.

If you are the admin and developer of the server, you can do pretty much anything with it.

For example, now that I am working on an AP server, I can take all your posts on !television@piefed.social and mirror them on !television@metacritics.zone. I could also avoid sending notifications to you, so you'd be aware of this only if you visited the site directly. How would you feel about that?

That's the answer.

That's a bad, short-sighted, wrong answer. We can have decentralized identifiers. We have more than a couple FEPs that deal with portable objects correctly, and in the last FediForum there was a lot proposed strategies to allow migrations from both dead and live servers. None of them requires a server to unilaterally steal the content from another actor and pass it as their own.

People were criticizing me like hell because of the mirror bots on alien.top, but at least the bots were stealing from Reddit and they were meant to get people to migrate. This is implementation from PieFed may have good intentions, but the will lead to bad outcomes.

I don't really care about that.

I do. I care very much about identity and authenticity in the Fediverse. A server that can take posts done in one group and publish as their own is as unreliable as a server who puts fake posts impersonating a popular user.

One of the fundamental issues with the current implementations in the Fediverse is that the server owns the keys and can do anything on behalf of the user.

That's the only major one i can think of.

again, why you are talking about Lemmy only? Mastodon instances from all sizes go down every other week.

but if you want to talk threadverse only: feddit.de. The original kbin, fmhy, one for writers that I forgot the name...