@jenniferplusplus (and of course there's someone in the mailing list for arguing for what seems to be "why is this necessary when we can let people create MUCs on subdomains with virtual hosting and use those for that", which doesn't really sound like a replacement from the perspective of someone who actually knows what discord is)
K
kopper@not-brain.d.on-t.work
@kopper@not-brain.d.on-t.work
Posts
-
Let's imagine I have like 2 or 3 reasons to be using discord today, and I'm trying to move them to something else in the next few weeks because I don't intend to give discord my ID. -
Let's imagine I have like 2 or 3 reasons to be using discord today, and I'm trying to move them to something else in the next few weeks because I don't intend to give discord my ID.@jenniferplusplus i've just today became aware of a XEP for "discord guilds" (xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0503.html) but it intentionally omits the access control bit so even if it had client support by itself (it's too new to be noticed as far as i can tell) it wouldn't be enough -
Let's imagine I have like 2 or 3 reasons to be using discord today, and I'm trying to move them to something else in the next few weeks because I don't intend to give discord my ID.@jenniferplusplus i would say something like "i hope i'm wrong about this" but i know that'll only bring me irc, matrix, or xmpp evangelism. i'm aware of all three and none of them are anywhere close to replacing discord
revolt/stoat could be interesting but it's centralized so you may as well use zulip if it fits the bill -
Let's imagine I have like 2 or 3 reasons to be using discord today, and I'm trying to move them to something else in the next few weeks because I don't intend to give discord my ID.@jenniferplusplus if there was a comparable option right now i truly believe we'd all have heard about it already. people aren't that reluctant to evangelize their favorite choice to anyone in vicinity, it's just none of them have the feature set necessary to actually be competition to discord -
I have deeply mixed feelings about #ActivityPub's adoption of JSON-LD, as someone who's spent way too long dealing with it while building #Fedify.@sl007 @hongminhee @julian i genuinely can't see where json-ld is relevant here. if your client wants to support wikidata and OSM then it can do that with or without json-ld being involved. you are going to have to document how this integration works anyhow if you want anyone else to do so -
I have deeply mixed feelings about #ActivityPub's adoption of JSON-LD, as someone who's spent way too long dealing with it while building #Fedify.@hongminhee @sl007 @julian attempting to support this kind of "data contortion" (i made this up and prolly isnt the right way to describe this) would rapidly balloon the scope of every fedi software ever. i don't believe anyone would want to develop for such ecosystem
a similar example i saw was someone attempting to explain how you can partially inline an as:object you as:Like'd in order to specify you only liked that past version of it and if it changed your like shouldn't count. without describing this exact scenario i don't believe any software, json-ld capable or not, would interpret that Like as such. same thing with the long-form text FEP which attempts to support non-activitypub authors -
I have deeply mixed feelings about #ActivityPub's adoption of JSON-LD, as someone who's spent way too long dealing with it while building #Fedify.@sl007 @hongminhee @julian i feel like you're falling into a trap i've seen a lot around AP spaces: just because the data can be contorted to represent something does not mean software will interpret it as such.
any software who wants to support wikidata statements and relations will have to go out of their way to implement that manually with or without json-ld in the mix, and interoperability between those software will have to specify how that works. and in your specification you can indeed make it so Simply Linking to the wikidata json-ld (which i don't believe it provides out of the box, it does for xml, turtle, and n-triples, if we're talking about rdf. if not, their bespoke json format is just as authoritative) can work (but i'd say using the Qxxx and Pxx IDs and letting the software figure out how to access it would be better!)
if you have the dream of making an as:Note and having it's as:attributedTo be the wikidata entity for alan turing... sorry, nobody other than maybe your own software will even attempt interpreting that -
I have deeply mixed feelings about #ActivityPub's adoption of JSON-LD, as someone who's spent way too long dealing with it while building #Fedify.@hongminhee i put this in a quote but people reading the thread may also be interested: json-ld compaction does not really save that much bandwidth over having all the namespaces explicitly written in property names if you're gzipping (and you are gzipping, right? this is json. make sure your nginx gzip_types includes ld+json and activity+json)
RE: not-brain.d.on-t.work/notes/aihftmbjpxdyb9k7 -
I have deeply mixed feelings about #ActivityPub's adoption of JSON-LD, as someone who's spent way too long dealing with it while building #Fedify.@natty @hongminhee i would imagine a Good hash algorithm wouldn't care about the similarity of the keys, no? -
I have deeply mixed feelings about #ActivityPub's adoption of JSON-LD, as someone who's spent way too long dealing with it while building #Fedify.@hongminhee if i can give one piece of advice to devs who want to process JSON-LD: dont bother compacting. you already know the schema you output (or you're just passing through what the user gives and it doesn't matter to you), serialize directly to the compacted representation, and only run expansion on incoming data
expansion is the cheapest JSON-LD operation (since all other operations depend on it and run it internally anyhow), and this will get you all the compatibility benefits of JSON-LD with little downsides (beyond more annoying deserialization code, as you have to map the expanded representation to your internal structure which will likely be modeled after the compacted one) -
I have deeply mixed feelings about #ActivityPub's adoption of JSON-LD, as someone who's spent way too long dealing with it while building #Fedify.@hongminhee take this part with a grain of salt because my benchmarks for it are with dotNetRdf which is the slowest C# implementation i know of (hence my replacement library), but JSON-LD is slower than RSA validation, which is one of the pain points around authorized fetch scalability
wetdry.world/@kopper/114678924693500011 -
I have deeply mixed feelings about #ActivityPub's adoption of JSON-LD, as someone who's spent way too long dealing with it while building #Fedify.@hongminhee from the point of view of someone who is "maintaining" a JSON-LD processing fedi software and has implemented their own JSON-LD processing library (which is, to my knowledge, the fastest in it's programming language), JSON-LD is pure overhead. there is nothing it allows for that can't be done with
1. making fields which take multiple values explicit
2. always using namespaces and letting HTTP compression take care of minimizing the transfer
without JSON-LD, fedi software could use zero-ish-copy deserialization for a majority of their objects (when strings aren't escaped) through tools like serde_json and Cow<str>, or System.Text.Json.JsonDocument. JSON-LD processing effectively mandates a JSON node DOM (in the algorithms standardized, you may be able to get rid of it with Clever Programming)
additionally, due to JSON-LD 1.1 features like @type:@json, you can not even fetch contexts ahead of time of running JSON DOM transformations, meaning all JSON-LD code has to be async (in the languages which has the concept), potentially losing out on significant optimizations that can't be done in coroutines due to various reasons (e.g. C# async methods can't have ref structs, Rust async functions usually require thread safety due to tokio's prevalence, even if they're ran in a single-threaded runtime)
this is after context processing introducing network dependency to the deserialization of data, wasting time and data on non-server cases (e.g. activitypub C2S). sure you can cache individual contexts, but then the context can change underneath you, desynchronizing your cached context and, in the worst case, opening you up to security vulnerabilities
json-ld is not my favorite part of this protocol