CIRCLE WITH A DOT

@box464 @newsmast @Bonfire this is FediMTL right? Might have to try to catch their talk. Bonfire definitely has better architecture for their customisable fedi server approach

RE: https://mastodon.online/@mastodonmigration/116122828571492086

This is just plain wrong. When you operate a smaller service on AT Protocol, you're not needing to process all the Bluesky data, which happens to be most of the network data at present.

Remember: we share resources to share cost.

The fediverse largely doesn't do that, which results in significant costs for individual operators. (Not to mention the incredibly amount of legal liabilities most operators are currently running with)

Woke up to like 10 emails from @nodebb today, I really need to figure out my notification settings

@evan @mariusor @benpate @steve @smallcircles yeah, it's the only way to do it.

But this infrastructure actually is what enables things like the AT Protocol "proxy through my PDS to the bluesky app view" or "proxy through my PDS to a custom feed generator" functionality.

That's how that all works.

@evan @benpate @steve @mariusor @smallcircles my understanding of proxyUrl is that it's just fetching a remote object, but without forwarding authorization

For many cases you want to forward the request as the authenticated user to the remote server, not doing the request anonymously

@benpate @steve @mariusor @smallcircles @evan i'm not sure proxyUrl does what I'm thinking of here

@mariusor @steve @smallcircles @evan well, your server *knows* it's access token to user mapping, so then you're just doing authorised fetch as that actor from server side

@steve @mariusor @smallcircles @evan this is a huge thread, but off-cuff comment: C2S will need a "proxy" where you can fetch a remote object **with** identity/authentication

RE: https://social.wake.st/@liaizon/116098978692376296

This is like saying you're doing "S3 Extension Proposals", because "multiple projects implemented S3-compatible (enough) APIs and Clients"

The only one that defines S3's API is AWS.

It's not a standard no matter how many projects implement it.

The Mastodon API is defined by Mastodon only. It's not a standard no matter how much people want to treat it as a standard. Use C2S / ActivityPub API.

If you want to advance the Fediverse, there's plenty of taskforces at Social Web CG that need help writing FEPs and standards documents. It's not as hard as you might think, just time consuming.

@smallcircles @eyeinthesky I was mostly thinking of the Follow activity and the following collection: it doesn't contain Follow activities, it contains Actors: https://hachyderm.io/users/thisismissem/following?page=1

In Mastodon the "likes" collection for a Note doesn't even include the Actors, just the count: https://browser.pub/https%3A%2F%2Fhachyderm.io%2Fusers%2Fthisismissem%2Fstatuses%2F115622304738688291%2Flikes

@smallcircles @eyeinthesky yeah, making everything an Actor is certainly a choice, and you could do that

@eyeinthesky @smallcircles I suspect this is incorrect. I am pretty sure the likes collection contains only objects, not the activities.

@evan was there an erratum for this? I feel like there was?

@eyeinthesky @smallcircles yeah, and this is a side effect of the activity (e.g., Like) adding to both my likes collection and the likes collection on your post.

So would my add be targeting two collections with an Activity?

What about Announce? That's add to my outbox, add to my boosts collection, and add to your post's boost collection.

@eyeinthesky @smallcircles (funnily enough, in AT Protocol, we only have collections we add records to, all the social layer is defined by applications above, which receive all the changes to records and infer meaning from that)

@eyeinthesky @smallcircles and how do I infer social meaning from you adding an object to a collection? I could only do that if I was adding an activity to a collection

@eyeinthesky @smallcircles that's the thing though! The likes collection doesn't contain activities, it contains objects.

@eyeinthesky @smallcircles you could, but you don't necessarily have to. Depends if adding to that collection has a social action besides the add I think.

Say I have a boops collection which contains actors I've booped. I could have a Boop activity with a side effect (because I want them to know I've booped them), or I could not, and just notify them that I added their Actor to this Collection.

@eyeinthesky @smallcircles yeah, there's those that like side-effects and those that dislike side-effects. Both are valid, AP just chose side effects.

I'm not sure I understand your question

@eyeinthesky @smallcircles because the activity isn't just about the change of the collection, but also notifying the other party our social intention. It could have required Like + Add, but that feels cumbersome and developers love side-effects.

@evan @dansup @quillmatiq Evan, perhaps spend some time introspecting why ActivityPub didn't get more adoption and why developers love AT Protocol.