Post · bonfire.cafe

@EverydayMoggie@sfba.social · 2 months ago

If that comes at the cost of having a single point of failure, a single place where content can be censored globally, as Bluesky has, then I would rather put up with the messiness of having separate accounts for all these services.

@deadsuperhero

Sean Tilley

@deadsuperhero@social.wedistribute.org · 2 months ago

@EverydayMoggie I understand your point, but that’s actually a categorical misunderstanding of how AT Protocol’s various layers work. The Fediverse is actually way more tightly coupled when it comes to instances and identities.

At least Blacksky has demonstrated that it’s possible to run the entire stack, and migrate absolutely everything to it from Bluesky.

Rob Fahrni

@fahrni@curmudgeon.cafe · 2 months ago

@deadsuperhero I was just thinking about what it would take to do ActivityPub for WordPress. Small world.

Michael 🇺🇦

@heluecht@pirati.ca · 2 months ago

@deadsuperhero At Friendica we already support C2S. But it is rather limited. There are a lot of questions that will need to be answered until C2S is fully usable.

Evan Prodromou

@evan@cosocial.ca · 2 months ago

@heluecht @deadsuperhero hey, is anyone interested in participating in the API task force?

django

@django@social.coop · 2 months ago

@deadsuperhero I don’t necessarily think we need the big players. Especially where those projects have stated their intent to stick to micro, or photo -blogging, with limited interop.

django

@django@social.coop · 2 months ago

@deadsuperhero I don’t necessarily think we need the big players. Especially where those projects have stated their intent to stick to micro, or photo -blogging, with limited interop.

django

@django@social.coop · 2 months ago

@deadsuperhero imho, building out c2s will allow new projects to bootstrap the front end, and focus on new application domains, or support multiple activity/object types.

Sean Tilley

@deadsuperhero@social.wedistribute.org · 2 months ago

Here’s the thing: Mastodon already has a really good API. There’s a whole ecosystem of clients around it, to the point that many other Fediverse implementations adopted it, so that they can use the apps.

I don’t think this is a bad thing in and of itself. But, if we want projects like Mastodon to support it, the value proposition has to provide things that the Mastodon API does not.

I think a killer feature to focus on would be identity management.

Nik

@nikclayton@mastodon.social · 2 months ago

@deadsuperhero

"Mastodon already has a really good API".

Not really. It's inconsistent, incompletely documented, stringly typed, has a poor backward/forward compatibility story, and no clean way for other servers to extend the API without risking breakage.

E.g., https://github.com/pachli/pachli-android/issues/2043

All of these are fixable, but Mastodon GmbH has no incentive to fix them.

🫧 socialcoding..

@smallcircles@social.coop · 2 months ago

@deadsuperhero

Yes. Mastodon has always given their own product decisions precedence over healthy evolution of the ecosystem as a whole. And despite many people being very frustrated about that, I think this is perfectly valid decision. After all choosing to implement an open standard should not come with the obligation to maintain/evolve that standard. It is only smart to do so, and Mastodon did this with an eye on their own product development.

Imho it is really the broader dev ecosystem that is at fault in letting the fedi be taken hostage by past Mastodon decisions, making them the post-facto #interoperability leader. As for Mastodon API I'd argue that its users are not on the fediverse. They are on Mastodon.

Identity management may be killer feature, but only when first a sound #ActivityPub foundation is in place. AS/AP isn't as-yet robust enough to be the future of social networking. I'd say the extensibility mechanism is killer feature, and having SDK's and devtools for that.

🫧 socialcoding..

@smallcircles@social.coop · 2 months ago

@deadsuperhero

Right now extensibility of #ActivityPub shapes up as custom app-by-app app-centric development where individual devs just pragmatically throw new stuff on the wire, and when their app gains any popularity or other apps to integrate in a similarish application, things are bolted onto that in random ways. That whole story really constitutes a Big Ball of Mud anti-pattern that only introduces protocol decay, tech debt, and whack-a-mole programming, that is very hard to get rid of once there exists an installed base.

The reason that we do things that way is very understandable. It works in a grassroots environment where indivualist devs find it very hard and not valuable to collaborate at scale in what amounts to a kind of design-by-consensus process. But it comes at a high cost, where interoperability is basically out the door and any app has to be shaped as a pretzel and adopt all the quirks introduced by predecessors in a particular app domain to fit itself on the wire.

🫧 socialcoding..

@smallcircles@social.coop · 2 months ago

@deadsuperhero

It does not need to be that way. I am quite happy after all (after being initially frustrated) by how #ATProto has disrupted things, and opened the eyes of devs in the #ActivityPub ecosystem that we must act or lose out (stay niche, which may be fine too) to the Atmoshpere and how it enables devs to focus on service and product delivery instead of low-level wire plumbing and continuous breakages.

ATProto also shows the way that we can now follow on the #fediverse to catch up again: cocreate a similar robust basis for people to build on. #Bluesky had the advantage of a greenfield start and dedicated team unburdened by past decisions. And they build this whole Lexicon system and ways to introspect functionality.

We can do that too, solve the #LinkedData conundrum, and create an extensibility mechanism that allows devs to focus on service modeling. The more introspection this mechanism allows for, the less design-by-consensus is required, easing expansion to new domains.

1+ more replies

Sean Tilley

@deadsuperhero@social.wedistribute.org · 2 months ago

Bluesky absolutely got it right with ATproto: you can make any kind of client, not just microblogging, and it will seamlessly work with your Bluesky identity. Everything you post goes into your personal storage, and the clients that know how to interpret special data types are able to reach into your PDS and the timelines you’re following to present that stuff.

ActivityPub API needs to follow a similar story.

Sean Tilley

@deadsuperhero@social.wedistribute.org · 2 months ago

Why do I care so much about this? A few reasons.

One, I don’t want to have a dozen different accounts across separate types of applications on the same network. I really hate that, it’s messy and does nothing to unify my identity across all the spaces I’m active on.

Two, a seamless login across the entire network could be very powerful for discovery. Instead of having to find people to follow on Pixelfed and PeerTube, the folks I’m already connected to would already be there, right when I sign in.

Three, we could develop a new generation of rich clients that all do really different things, but all tie back to a singular identity. “Sign In With ActivityPub” could work for the entire network, and it wouldn’t have to be a hack using Mastodon’s API.

Brendan Jones

@Brendanjones@fosstodon.org · 2 months ago

@deadsuperhero I don’t want a unified experience across services. I use Mastodon, Loops, Pixelfed etc for completely different things. I follow different people. Different topics (hashtags).

My point being, there has to be a layer to separate the services somewhere. Right now it’s at the account level, which honestly is fine for me because hey I’m used to signing in separately to Twitter, Instagram, etc.

But if accounts are unified, at what level do you separate the services?

2 more replies

Sean Tilley

@deadsuperhero@social.wedistribute.org · 2 months ago

Finally, I think there are some serious improvements we can bring to fill the gaps that the current spec is missing. What if we had a standard endpoint for notifications?

Suppose we also developed a standard way of doing timelines as well, and used it as a springboard for custom feeds that could work with any app, any client, and any server?

There’s a lot of useful stuff we could do here to make the whole thing extremely compelling for anyone building on this network.

1 more replies

Sean Tilley

@deadsuperhero@social.wedistribute.org · 2 months ago

Would love to hear what @evan thinks about this.

Evan Prodromou

@evan@cosocial.ca · 2 months ago

@deadsuperhero

I am heart to heart with you on this, friend.

GIF

Evan Prodromou

@evan@cosocial.ca · 2 months ago

@deadsuperhero so, here's my best bet. I can be wrong!

1. Get some servers to implement the API well.
2. Get some must-have clients that run on those servers. This shows the value of the API.
3. Our leading servers shift to supporting it.

That may work; I don't know. It's my best bet right now!

I want to note that WordPress is working on the API!

django

@django@social.coop · 2 months ago

@evan @deadsuperhero there are also a number of frameworks that have already signalled interest or intent in supporting the API:
#Bonfire #FedBox #Fedify #Emissary

2 more replies

Sean Tilley

@deadsuperhero@social.wedistribute.org · 2 months ago

@evan Yeah, I mostly agree with this. It’s just that the buy-in is a little bit of a chicken and egg problem. You need servers to adopt it, but you need a compelling first mover. Bonfire, maybe?

The spec definitely needs love, too. I think one of the harder things is building a timeline out of inbox activities. I feel like maybe a future version of the API could specify timelines somehow, whether it’s an endpoint or some kind of basic query? Maybe there’s even a way to implement alternative timelines at that level?

These are all just guesses on my part, but I feel like this could be a gateway to universal custom feeds.

1+ more replies

julian

@julian@activitypub.space · 2 months ago

Does the inbox have to map to a timeline, specifically? Mastodon called this out as being difficult to do because you would have to real-time parse the inbox every time you wanted to load the timeline.

Of course one could always reduce the inbox into a single timeline and serve that instead, but then we're braching out with our own proprietary APIs again.

Is that ok?

@deadsuperhero@social.wedistribute.org @evan@cosocial.ca

Sean Tilley

@deadsuperhero@social.wedistribute.org · 2 months ago

@julian @general @evan Again, this is sort of why I’m advocating for supporting timelines as a concept in the ActivityPub API. Instead of repeatedly parsing the inbox, we could do exactly what you’re saying with some kind of representation of a timeline. Even if it’s just plain old algorithmic time-sort.

julian

@julian@activitypub.space · 2 months ago

On the other hand, however... If the ActivityPub API were used in an S2S context, enabling something like NodeBB to send activities on behalf of a Mastodon user, then it wouldn't matter that there is no GET /timeline, because all you need is POST /outbox and the Mastodon API handles their end.

Vice versa, NodeBB would use its own API to render a /world feed.

@deadsuperhero@social.wedistribute.org @evan@cosocial.ca

🫧 socialcoding..

@smallcircles@social.coop · 2 months ago

@julian @deadsuperhero @evan

Can't help but wonder about terminology use and abstractions they indicate. Nowhere in the specs is there mention of 'timeline' and neither of 'feed' (except as example use in AS).

I feel we started with powerful specs to be able to model *any* social networking use case. But where the specs had blanks gradually the impls filled these in with leaky abstractions such that fedi is now hammered into a very narrow social media microblogging domain.

If an app needs "Timeline" and "Feed" concepts, then it should model them. Given the actor-based nature of AP they might be actors, or whatever is best. These concept are about solution development, i.e. what is built on top of the protocol, and not indicative of core protocol capabilities.

There's so much confusion on "where does the protocol end vs. where does my app design start".

SDK's should offer "Addressable actors exchanging msgs with object payload", and hide all impl details for the solution developer.

Evan Prodromou

@evan@cosocial.ca · 2 months ago

@smallcircles @julian @deadsuperhero we call them collections.

https://www.w3.org/TR/activitypub/#collections

ActivityPub

The ActivityPub protocol is a decentralized social networking protocol based upon the [ActivityStreams] 2.0 data format. It provides a client to server API for creating, updating and deleting content, as well as a federated server to server API for delivering notifications and content.

🫧 socialcoding..

@smallcircles@social.coop · 2 months ago

@evan @julian @deadsuperhero

Except when they are called other names instead ;p

A timeline is a different thing than a collection imho. And an AS collection has some very particular functionality, which if I model a timeline in my app may not supported (e.g. reverse ordering).

Collection / 'timeline' is one of those words where sometimes they indicate an app domain, and sometimes a core protocol mechanism. Same is true with 'follow' which is sometimes a user action, sometimes indicates low-level publish/subscribe.

For core capabilities that must be part of the specs, in 'protocol space' it may be better to use terminology that is more common in messaging architectures and all the various architecture patterns that are involved. Perhaps idk we deal with a time-ordered event log or something like that.

Steve Bate

@steve@social.technoetic.com · 2 months ago

@smallcircles @evan An AS2 Collection cannot be a timeline (in general). It’s not even ordered. An AS2 OrderedCollection (a subtype of Collection) might be ordered by time or not, so it’s also not a timeline (in general). When they are ordered by some time value (unspecified in AP) they are often called “streams” in the spec. The Mastodon content timelines are not the same as AP activity streams although a filtered AP stream can be transformed to a content timeline.

Steve Bate

@steve@social.technoetic.com · 2 months ago

@smallcircles To follow up on the discussion from yesterday, @evan has created a proposal for another kind of “event stream” that is not necessarily associated with *any* AP collection type (see Example 1). This is more aligned with my mental model of an event feed/stream, where a timeline^1 is the history of the feed after optional filtering and content materialization. (^1 However, the terms are often used interchangeably in the Fedi.)

https://swicg.github.io/activitypub-api/sse

Server-Sent Events For the ActivityPub API

🫧 socialcoding..

@smallcircles@social.coop · 2 months ago

@steve @evan

Oh, that is very interesting. I will queue this up for inclusion in the delightful fediverse development curated list.

#Datastar may be a great library to check out here, and goes further in #hypermedia approach, where #HTMX considers itself feature-complete. Datastar uses #SSE to keep the connection to the client open. The client-side JS lib that is needed is super small. In datastar apps most of the business logic lives in the backend, and it lends itself very well for #EventSourcing. The original author/co-maintainer uses it with #NATS which also serves as the event store.