6 ms·

I presume this is here partly because Threads is in the news. To me interesting part will be what subset Threads will support? For instance, ActivityPub specs

I presume this is here partly because Threads is in the news. To me interesting part will be what subset Threads will support? For instance, ActivityPub specs start like this: "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." However, that client-to-server API is not even implemented by Mastodon. It's unlikely Threads will support it either, leaving those who want to make own clients in the cold. Then there is stuff like outbox, which contains past messages, but for instance, Mastodon does not fetch old messages at all, causing a subpar experience: "Older posts from other servers are not displayed" when browsing profiles. If Threads don't see the need to support outbox either, it makes browsing Threads content from your own small server an infuriating experience.

shagie 3y ago
https://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-vocabulary/#extendedtypes https://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-vocabulary/#extendedty... > Support for specific extended vocabulary types is expected to vary, with implementations only selecting the extended types and properties that make sense within the specific context and requirements of those applications. However, to avoid possible interoperability issues, implementations must avoid using extension types or properties that unduly overlap with or duplicate the extended vocabulary defined here.
anileated 3y ago
It seems logical if Threads focused on client-to-server interoperation first, since in theory that would allow more people to use third-party clients but not third-party servers so Meta gets a hold of all the unencrypted messages.
- thejohnconway 3y ago
  I’m pretty sure they are going to do the opposite, support server-to-server, and never support client-to-server. They have been meeting with the maintainers of Mastodon and admins of large instances. Their stated goal is to allow migration off without losing your social graph (this is obviously a lie about motivation, but that’s not what I’m taking about here). This is all about server-to-server implementation. So, they are going to be part of the server-to-server Fediverse, and keep all of the juicy app data from Threads users to themselves.
  - Lt_Riza_Hawkeye 3y ago
    Yes, plus if they support client-server then kill it later, they risk the same kind of backlash that happened to Twitter and Reddit when they killed third party clients. But if they only support server-server when they kill it, they can just send an email to all the geeks telling them "import your account into threads by X date!" and most "normal" users will never notice
    - thejohnconway 3y ago
      Supporting server-to-server ActivityPub is slightly risky for them as it gives people an alternative, and there will always be outward bleed. On the other hand I think it takes a lot of pressure off potential legal troubles around being a monopoly (which they must be worried about if they actually manage to kill Twitter). I predict if they manage to be the overwhelmingly dominant platform in the Fediverse, they’ll keep it working. If they see another big competitor jumping in and taking a lot of users (or hell, if Mastodon starts to eat their lunch), I’m not so sure.
unshavedyak 3y ago
Is that client-server API robust enough to .. care? Why don't other (any other?) FOSS implementations support it? I'm toying around with my own and that's interesting. I'd love to support it but if no one else supports it no clients will support it either. Granted eventually i expect i'd want some client-server API so i may as well use ActivityPubs. Nonetheless the lack of adoption feels odd.
- mariusor 3y ago
  There are other projects that support the client to server part of the specification (see my profile for an example in the FedBOX project, and from the more mainstream ones there's Pleroma AFAIR). Generally developers justify not adding it to their implementations with the fact that is not specified in sufficient detail. Personally I think it's mostly laziness and a lack of imagination - but I'm biased.
RobotToaster 3y ago
>Then there is stuff like outbox, which contains past messages, but for instance, Mastodon does not fetch old messages at all It's infuriating how little support activitypub outboxes have. It seems like the perfect way to make small instances work well.
- mariusor 3y ago
  I think the justification Eugen (Mastodon's main developer) gave for not loading a user's past activities is that it would actually harm smaller instances when a user goes viral and the whole network hammers their servers for their content. I am not convinced of the reasoning, and, in my opinion it's actually working against the idea of "federation", and even against the whole paradigm the internet is built upon: as a UserAgent you should retrieve content when the user requests it.
  - worrycue 3y ago
    > I think the justification Eugen (Mastodon's main developer) gave for not loading a user's past activities is that it would actually harm smaller instances when a user goes viral and the whole network hammers their servers for their content. Maybe we need some kind of protocol that can spread the load where popular messages are duplicated across the network instead of being stuck on one node that can get overwhelmed.
    - ComodoHacker 3y ago
      Maybe we don't need to value virality so much.
      - mariusor 3y ago
        I doubt "valuing virality" is the real problem. But when you're exposed to a universal network whose numbers increase every day, there are moments when it happens no matter if you want it or not. The "slashdot effect" has been coined maybe 25 years ago, so it's obviously not a new thing. :P
tedunangst 3y ago
The client server protocol lacks support for many basic operations, like search. It's a late addition to the spec, because somebody felt a server protocol shouldn't be released without a client protocol. Swap the polarity of the inbox and outbox, and presto you've got a client protocol. Except clients don't want to talk to servers the same way servers talk to other servers.
srameshc 3y ago
I posted this not because of 'Thereads' but because I have been trying to implement ActivityPub and somehow I missed this document in my previous searches. I want to implement ActivityPub support for my blog in some form so like RSS, anyone subscribes can listen to it.
- laurex 3y ago
  This will be helpful for you https://github.com/dariusk/rss-to-activitypub https://github.com/dariusk/rss-to-activitypub

shagie 3y ago

https://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-vocabulary/#extendedtypes https://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-vocabulary/#extendedty... > Support for specific extended vocabulary types is expected to vary, with implementations only selecting the extended types and properties that make sense within the specific context and requirements of those applications. However, to avoid possible interoperability issues, implementations must avoid using extension types or properties that unduly overlap with or duplicate the extended vocabulary defined here.

anileated 3y ago

It seems logical if Threads focused on client-to-server interoperation first, since in theory that would allow more people to use third-party clients but not third-party servers so Meta gets a hold of all the unencrypted messages.

thejohnconway 3y ago
I’m pretty sure they are going to do the opposite, support server-to-server, and never support client-to-server. They have been meeting with the maintainers of Mastodon and admins of large instances. Their stated goal is to allow migration off without losing your social graph (this is obviously a lie about motivation, but that’s not what I’m taking about here). This is all about server-to-server implementation. So, they are going to be part of the server-to-server Fediverse, and keep all of the juicy app data from Threads users to themselves.
- Lt_Riza_Hawkeye 3y ago
  Yes, plus if they support client-server then kill it later, they risk the same kind of backlash that happened to Twitter and Reddit when they killed third party clients. But if they only support server-server when they kill it, they can just send an email to all the geeks telling them "import your account into threads by X date!" and most "normal" users will never notice
  - thejohnconway 3y ago
    Supporting server-to-server ActivityPub is slightly risky for them as it gives people an alternative, and there will always be outward bleed. On the other hand I think it takes a lot of pressure off potential legal troubles around being a monopoly (which they must be worried about if they actually manage to kill Twitter). I predict if they manage to be the overwhelmingly dominant platform in the Fediverse, they’ll keep it working. If they see another big competitor jumping in and taking a lot of users (or hell, if Mastodon starts to eat their lunch), I’m not so sure.

unshavedyak 3y ago

Is that client-server API robust enough to .. care? Why don't other (any other?) FOSS implementations support it? I'm toying around with my own and that's interesting. I'd love to support it but if no one else supports it no clients will support it either. Granted eventually i expect i'd want some client-server API so i may as well use ActivityPubs. Nonetheless the lack of adoption feels odd.

mariusor 3y ago
There are other projects that support the client to server part of the specification (see my profile for an example in the FedBOX project, and from the more mainstream ones there's Pleroma AFAIR). Generally developers justify not adding it to their implementations with the fact that is not specified in sufficient detail. Personally I think it's mostly laziness and a lack of imagination - but I'm biased.

RobotToaster 3y ago

>Then there is stuff like outbox, which contains past messages, but for instance, Mastodon does not fetch old messages at all It's infuriating how little support activitypub outboxes have. It seems like the perfect way to make small instances work well.

mariusor 3y ago
I think the justification Eugen (Mastodon's main developer) gave for not loading a user's past activities is that it would actually harm smaller instances when a user goes viral and the whole network hammers their servers for their content. I am not convinced of the reasoning, and, in my opinion it's actually working against the idea of "federation", and even against the whole paradigm the internet is built upon: as a UserAgent you should retrieve content when the user requests it.
- worrycue 3y ago
  > I think the justification Eugen (Mastodon's main developer) gave for not loading a user's past activities is that it would actually harm smaller instances when a user goes viral and the whole network hammers their servers for their content. Maybe we need some kind of protocol that can spread the load where popular messages are duplicated across the network instead of being stuck on one node that can get overwhelmed.
  - ComodoHacker 3y ago
    Maybe we don't need to value virality so much.
    - mariusor 3y ago
      I doubt "valuing virality" is the real problem. But when you're exposed to a universal network whose numbers increase every day, there are moments when it happens no matter if you want it or not. The "slashdot effect" has been coined maybe 25 years ago, so it's obviously not a new thing. :P

tedunangst 3y ago

The client server protocol lacks support for many basic operations, like search. It's a late addition to the spec, because somebody felt a server protocol shouldn't be released without a client protocol. Swap the polarity of the inbox and outbox, and presto you've got a client protocol. Except clients don't want to talk to servers the same way servers talk to other servers.

srameshc 3y ago

I posted this not because of 'Thereads' but because I have been trying to implement ActivityPub and somehow I missed this document in my previous searches. I want to implement ActivityPub support for my blog in some form so like RSS, anyone subscribes can listen to it.

laurex 3y ago
This will be helpful for you https://github.com/dariusk/rss-to-activitypub https://github.com/dariusk/rss-to-activitypub