the small shiver of disgust every time i hear the word 'content'
Post
Remote status
Context
20i think that's one of the fundmental split personality issues in the fediverse. people say they don't want normies on here, but they also say that normies are retarded for not coming here because it's clearly objectively better. it's either / or. is this a secret club or is this a 200 million user network?
artificial virality and fake trend manipulation are how a subset of creators make a ton of money on centralized platforms. thinking you could be recipient of that drives a bunch of the lesser creators who toil on the edge of quitting. the platform shapes the output completely for its profit. we don't have that mechanism so why would a creator come here instead. every time they try they find out their organic audience is a lot smaller.
coming back to bao, she wrote that the fediverse is 'just twitter', and i think she's very wrong about that. not even pleroma is 'just mastodon'. i can detect the software of the user on the other end of a fedi thread with high certainty just from their posting style. all these seemingly inconsequential technological and sociological differences create different communities and we should probably not try to social engineer them too much.
i think we should keep building, but i don't think we should keep building for audiences that don't want to be here and that we don't want here. and i think we should completely ignore all foundations, standards bodies and other weirdo commies who want to steal our precious bodily fluids
If I were to design groups for AP, I would make a Group Actor with a posts OrderedCollection and a list of Actors who can manually Add and Remove Objects to the Collection. With the ability to set certain instances/Actors as automatic approval. You POST to an inbox, if you are in the auto approve list, the instance automatically adds that Object to the Collection. You aren't in the auto approve list, you get put in a mod queue. Viewing that group would be simply fetching the first X number of pages/posts in it, which can remote instances keep in some cache.
We can spend years deliberating how to do the thing and waiting for others to cooperate or we could do some basic MVP, iterate on it and hope others will follow suit.
I don't think Pleroma Chats are bad, they are just underimplemented and lack groupchat support because no groups I guess.
Look, Pleroma is in no position to bake a feature, and say "take it, or leave it" and expect everyone interested to take it, or pull a Mastodon and force it on everyone through, the shear number of users. If you want to do groups properly, for which there is interest in the FEP community and also in the Mastodon community which used guppe quite a lot. I think it would best not to half-ass it and deal with the consequences later.
This mentality is how we got to the point where there are 3 different ways to federate emoji reactions (Pleroma EmojiReact, Misskey's _misskey-emoji and someone else already did Like with an emoji field in JSON). Same issue with quotes, Akkoma/Pleroma quoteURI, Misskey _misskey-quote and now Mastodon's Quote Activity. How did we get here, nothing was ever documented and no specification how it works written so someone that lived in the Mastodon vacuum had no idea that Pleroma does EmojiReact.
That's the whole point of FEPs. It's a place for discussion about AP extensions for people that care. There's no process to get in besides write a spec and implement later. If we want to fix this messed protocol and do it properly, collaboratively, and not waster our time, this is the way to go. It doesn't have take years, because the window for a FEP to be "finalized" is a year after the last update or there abouts. It won't take literal years.
I don't think Pleroma Chats are dead, nor do I think they are bad, but there is no documentation on how they are supposed to work in AP, so very few implemented them. And how will you notify others that they exist if not by making a FEP and a somewhat high frequency issue tracker and announce them on activitypub.rocks.
cc @silverpill just because I've seen you talk about how good groups could work and I think my post above isn't completely stupid. And also sice FEPs got mentioned.
@phnt @i @lain @hj @sun I think you're right about FEPs and cooperation. The optimal strategy is cooperate by default and defect only when the other side defects.
With quotes we were almost successful. The initial version of Mastodon's consent-respecting quotes was based on FEP-e232, but later they decided to introduce a new property.
Now there's FEP-521a (public keys), which they expressed interest in implementing.
Even with Mastodon, it's worth trying.
>Groups
I think Lemmy's implementation is not bad. There is also Conversation Containers from Hubzillaverse, and a possibility of convergence, see this thread https://lemmy.ml/post/43519233
Replies
1Amazing...
20:59:41.304 [error] Could not decode user at fetch https://lemmy.ml/post/43519233, {:cross_domain_redirect, true}Thanks, I'll look into it later.
20:59:41.430 [error] Object rejected while fetching https://lemmy.ml/post/43519233 {:fetch, {:error, {:cross_domain_redirect, true}}}