4 ms·
To me this isn't too strange. Sure it's different but the alternative is our current system where each single social network implements its own video player whe
by contravariant 7y ago
To me this isn't too strange. Sure it's different but the alternative is our current system where each single social network implements its own video player when it grows big enough.
I'm still trying to understand ActivityPub / Fediverse completely, but once you manage to make several social apps use the same underlying protocol then the app just becomes an interface and the protocol runs the social network. And just like how a file system has various kinds of tools to interact with different kinds of files, it's not odd for a network of shared 'things' to have several tools to interact with different kind of things.
- maxwelljoslyn 7y ago> once you manage to make several social apps use the same underlying protocol then the app just becomes an interface Thanks, contravariant! This was the key idea I was missing.
- chrismorgan 7y agoIn theory the app just becomes the interface and the protocol runs the network, but in practice the implementations are hooked on the idea of being in control of the entire experience, and the app runs the protocol. Also, ActivityPub seems to be more like a vocabulary—apps then use their own data models, extensions, restrictions, &c.; some compatibly (e.g. Pleroma/Mastodon), some not. And from what I’ve seen, if I want to host several apps, each has to be on its own domain. Perhaps this is not a fundamental limitation (I don’t know), but it does seem to be a de facto limitations. I don’t want to host Mastodon at x.chrismorgan.info and post as me@x.chrismorgan.info, something else at y.chrismorgan.info and post as me@y.chrismorgan.info, &c. I want to use one identity across all the apps, and be me@chrismorgan.info for whichever app, which would then match my email address.