@raphael @corruptian My fedi timeline is always quieter during the summer. But I think there is also a bigger trend caused by the lack of innovation (which of course happens, but on the fringes, while Mastodon still doesn't have quote posts).
Notices by silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social), page 32
-
silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Wednesday, 12-Jun-2024 02:19:31 JST silverpill -
silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Tuesday, 11-Jun-2024 06:37:22 JST silverpill @mikedev I guess one can understand FEP-ef61 as a collection synchronization protocol.
-
silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Tuesday, 11-Jun-2024 06:31:53 JST silverpill @mikedev No, I don't want to forbid signing of collections. I am concerned about clients, because they can't do that easily. A client would need to re-sign outbox collection after every activity, and somehow send it to the server. If some other collection is modified, the process will be even more complicated.
Therefore, clients should not be required to sign collections, and servers should not be required to verify their integrity.
-
silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Monday, 10-Jun-2024 17:50:34 JST silverpill @mikedev @streams What do you think about adding integrity proofs to collections?
https://mitra.social/objects/018fea26-7605-6128-ee72-5291484d8206
-
silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Monday, 10-Jun-2024 17:43:00 JST silverpill @giacelvecio @mikedev I can see it, no summary though (it is not present in the source too)
-
silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Monday, 10-Jun-2024 08:58:04 JST silverpill >Support for <details> and <summary> HTML elements
Oh, nice. @elvecio @giacelvecio we can test it now :)
-
silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Sunday, 09-Jun-2024 08:08:18 JST silverpill @Hyolobrika You can do that with smart contracts but it will be very expensive. Hosting your own instance is much simpler and cheaper
-
silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Sunday, 09-Jun-2024 06:17:38 JST silverpill @elvecio @experimentingspiritus Mitra supports sensitive flag on media, but not text CWs as in Mastodon.
Mastodon's implementation of text CWs is broken, I'm not going to do that. However, Mitra can render <details> HTML tags -
silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Saturday, 08-Jun-2024 05:36:04 JST silverpill @elvecio @experimentingspiritus I don't remember talking about content warnings... The top post here doesn't have any indication of a CW in its ActivityPub representation
-
silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Saturday, 08-Jun-2024 00:37:22 JST silverpill @Hyolobrika I haven't tried it yet, but DeltaChat is based on email.
-
silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Friday, 07-Jun-2024 23:49:55 JST silverpill @hongminhee I'm following the fedify-example actor, so if you are ready for FEP-8b32 interop test, you can publish a signed Create(Note) activity, my server will verify the proof
-
silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Friday, 07-Jun-2024 23:25:29 JST silverpill @hongminhee Awesome! My server can parse that.
I shall add Fedify to the implementation list in FEP-521a
-
silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Friday, 07-Jun-2024 22:55:49 JST silverpill @julian @nutomic When Lemmy creates a post it sends both Announce(Object) and Announce(Create(Object)). I don't know about accepting Announce(Object), but likely it does that too
-
silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Friday, 07-Jun-2024 18:34:27 JST silverpill @soatok The stated goals are similar to those of FEP-c390. In FEP-c390, however, the key is linked directly to an actor object, it doesn't require a separate server.
>We want Fediverse users to be able to publish a public key that is bound to their identity, which anyone else on the Internet can fetch and then use for various purposes.
-
silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Friday, 07-Jun-2024 18:29:43 JST silverpill @julian It might be because of what FEP-1b12 says in "Implementations" section:
>This document is written based on existing group implementations in Lemmy, Friendica, Hubzilla, Lotide and Peertube. These already federate successfully in production.
Some of these implementations may support Announce(Activity) today, but as far as I know they didn't support it when FEP-1b12 was written
-
silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Friday, 07-Jun-2024 07:46:44 JST silverpill @julian From ActivityPub spec:
>ActivityPub actors are generally one of the ActivityStreams Actor Types, but they don't have to be.
The looser definition is correct.
-
silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Friday, 07-Jun-2024 07:41:09 JST silverpill @julian @trwnh @angusmcleod Announce(Object) is a boost/share/repost in Mastodon and other micro-blogging apps. I think it can't be considered a variant of FEP-1b12. And the FEP only talks about announcing activities:
>In case the incoming activity is deemed valid, the group MUST wrap it in an Announce activity, with the original activity as object
-
silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Thursday, 06-Jun-2024 05:49:47 JST silverpill Collections in ActivityPub are special, because they are not independent objects, but aggregations of activities. I think FEP-ef61 implementations should not add integrity proofs to them, but treat them as virtual objects whose representations are always server-generated. Re-signing collections and collection pages after every update is not practical.
-
silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Thursday, 06-Jun-2024 05:02:03 JST silverpill @evan @alex @Gargron I think they can also federate in text-only mode (description + link to media). Not perfect UX-wise, but a much stronger protection.
-
silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Thursday, 06-Jun-2024 04:50:34 JST silverpill @Hyolobrika In theory, Bitmessage, when used with Tor or a similar tool. But it was not successful.
I think compartmentalization is a good idea: use different identities for different contacts / groups of contacts. This can be practiced with Matrix or XMPP too. SimpleX seems to be automating this by generating a separate identity for each contact. And it is actually a smart thing to do, but it is not a "protocol without identifiers", that's bullshit.