3 ms·
Reading that - I'm really not sure that AT Protocol has a much better story there either. (as I understand it) the data has to live in a PDS, PDS are keyed by
by compyman 5mo ago
Reading that - I'm really not sure that AT Protocol has a much better story there either.
(as I understand it) the data has to live in a PDS, PDS are keyed by accounts, so you are similarly stymied for collaborative projects? I guess AT Proto is still a real work in progress so maybe that story has improved since the last time I checked it out.
- knowtheory 5mo agoYeah, capability for group permissions is a key part of the work happening on permissioned data in ATproto right now. https://dholms.leaflet.pub/3meluqcwky22a https://dholms.leaflet.pub/3meluqcwky22a https://dholms.leaflet.pub/3mfrsbcn2gk2a https://dholms.leaflet.pub/3mfrsbcn2gk2a https://dholms.leaflet.pub/3mguviy6iks2a https://dholms.leaflet.pub/3mguviy6iks2a https://dholms.leaflet.pub/3mhj6bcqats2o https://dholms.leaflet.pub/3mhj6bcqats2o
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- pfraze 5mo agoYeah the problems they seemed to have were over collaborative data structures with permissions. You’re right about how atproto solves that, which means you’re using CRDTs if you need to collaborate. If that’s a fit mismatch, I’d tell people to just appoint api servers which wrap a repo and provide the needed semantics.
- nerdypepper 5mo ago> But federated authorization is one of the things ActivityPub doesn't define, and leaves it to us to figure out. this is the key bit, atproto has this. sidecar services like knot can use service authentication[0] for authenticated requests. [0]: https://atproto.com/guides/auth https://atproto.com/guides/auth