On activities in #Twitter. Is Twitter heading to #ActivityPub also?! ...I checked via Twitter's web interface: I do see the message favorited... and you know, Twitter shows, at least in web interface, your "Like Activity". I need to investigate, maybe #AndStatus will be able to receive such some day... https://loadaverage.org/attachment/4018314
This requires some adjustment and fine-tuning, but you can subscribe to it through Diaspora, Friendica, GNU Social, Mastodon, Socialhome, Hubzilla, or anywhere that can use #OStatus, #ActivityPub, #Diaspora Protocol, or #Zot.
> So if the proposed client/server protocol says the client should send a request twice and discards the first result (a Level 3/design-level statement), and the designer tells you it’s because there are three different kinds of request handlers in the codebase, and Bob’s sometimes gets it wrong the first time (a Level 2/implementation-level statement), you should get confused. You should be as confused as if someone wanted to call a file or write to a function.
Security between #OStatus and #ActivityPub is exactly the same. If that's the sole advantage you're looking for, you'll be soundly disappointed on an AP-only network.
As for the #blockwars problem that Roy @schestowitz mentioned, the only possible solutions are (1) to put better blocking and filtering tools in the hands of the users instead of concentrating more power into admins' hands; and (2) smaller instances instead of larger ones.
Want to see a decentralized video hosting site?! I sure do! Check out this run-down of #PeerTube, an awesome new video platform that supports #ActivityPub
@silverwizard wrote: "AndStatus is an Android app for OStatus clients" This is wrong. #OStatus is a server-to-server protocol, #AndStatus connects to servers using server-to-client protocols. This is why AndStatus doesn't know and doesn't depend on OStatus protocol. Moreover, #Mastodon 's client-to-server protocol is still based on outdated Twitter like API, not on #ActivityPub, unfortunately. @jackyalcine
@jark Reviewing and improving #ActivityPub specification is not about coding/programming. It's about analysis and modeling. But my experience shows that it's hard to notice problems and mistakes in such documents, until you don't try to start actually using it in practise, in this case - starting to implement some application using this specification OR starting to adapt this specification, as an Analyst, for some concrete application. This way you will read every phrase, some of them - many times... @mike @verius @clacke @cwebber
@cwebber@octodon.social The same for me: Only implementing now domain model of #ActivityPub /#ActivityStreams in my #AndStatus application I became deep enough aware of the specs' advantages and shortcomings... so I initiated another round of the spec fixes. Sorry that not months ago... @bea @teascade @neon
Yuri Volkov (yvolk@loadaverage.org)'s status on Thursday, 12-Oct-2017 06:57:54 UTC
Yuri Volkov@cwebber@octodon.social Thank you for reply to the #ActivityPub issue at https://github.com/w3c/activitypub/issues/260 I followed the discussion there plus copying my follow-up below: 1. Let's go step by step. Explicitly stating that Actors and Users are different entities is a good way forward. BTW the confusing phrase "users are represented as "actors" here" should also be changed to "users are mapped to actors" with addition, how (you suggested wording...) Where can we see current draft for review how it looks now? You are too quick to state that the issue is resolved :-) 2. Let's check if the statement is valid: * ""user" is technically an entity outside the protocol" 2.1 First of all the term is used tens times in the document, which describes the protocol: https://www.w3.org/TR/activitypub/ 2.2. The term "user" is used for two different things, actually: * for "natural person from a real world" * and for "user's account at a Servetr" (my interpretation). The second meaning is definitely "inside protocol". Just look at these phrases, from many available, for example: * "This protocol permits a client to act on behalf of a user." * "Client to server interaction takes place through clients posting Activities to a user's outbox" My conclusion is that a User in the second meaning "user's account at a Server" is definitely a part of the protocol description. 3. As now we agreed on separation of an Actor from a User, let's look again, what we read in the document. 3.1 You know: there are many places, where the word user(s) should be replaced with a word Actor(s), e.g. here {again, one of many examples): * "The Follow activity is used to subscribe to the activities of another user." Attributes of a User are presented as attributes of an Actor in examples...
Hi, I'm @mmn, maintainer of GNUsocial. I reacted when it was written that "many people on gnusocial are angry" and wish to say that !GNUsocial has only love and appreciation for #Mastodon and #ActivityPub.
I believe cooperation is important for libre software and the federated social web. I believe our plural and diverse community should embrace and encourage contributors and development. Any progress we want to make - regardless of anyone's preferred technology - is impeded by hostility and empowered by friendship.
So I want to say thank @cwebber @gargron et al. for all the hard work you actively put into ActivityPub. It's awesome that so many users get in touch with !fs via open protocols.
@usbhump Evan P's Status\.Net startup lost its funding. Around the same time, he was trying to get the developers of the underlying protocols that compose #OStatus to agree to make changes to their protocols to enable enhanced privacy. Among the organizations he was trying to motivate was Google, which had recently introduced #GPlus and was no long interested in the open web.
In a hurry to cut costs, he developed the #Pump.io software and protocol to be simpler to develop and cheaper to operate, and to offer some additional privacy built into the protocol. And also to be independent of the progress some of these protocols.
Pump was built with the idea that most federated networks would switch protocols to be compatible. That did not happen. But the hope is that its descendant #ActivityPub will unite the disparate networks.
@gargron Don't oversell AP. If you start to sound like a used car salesperson, people will become suspicious of your motives and the veracity of your claims.
@cwebber Indeed you and others involved with AP spec development have been very inclusive, inviting and encouraging. I very much appreciate your (and everyone else's) efforts that have been put into #ActivityPub.
@cwebber The only reason !GNUsocial doesn't have #ActivityPub yet is because I have a fulltime job and noone else has been up for the task .]
Though I'm pretty sure it'd still just be the 100% public parts of AP that would be used/promoted, as I'm pretty much convinced there's no such thing as privacy in the social sphere anyway and anyone using "private" communication in an environment like !GNUsocial or #Mastodon is fooled either by the platform, the administrator or other users. (anything accessible via a web browser isn't made for privacy)
> I think this sort of system would be perfect, and the only thing required to build it was the right decentralization protocol, which has appeared recently – ActivityPub.
He links to a site that doesn't appear to have any content. Haven't checked out his repo.