ActivityPub: The "Worse Is Better" Approach to Federated Social Networking https://blog.dereferenced.org/activitypub-the-worse-is-better-approach-to-federated-social-networking
@kaniini There are a couple of good points in here, but this is a really cynical take on AP.
I'd agree it has some blindspots that need to be addressed, but lines such as "In an ideal world, the number of ActivityPub implementations would be zero." is pure hyperbole.
Further I would give it more deference if it presented a viable option as opposed to "this is bad, but I don't know how to do it better"
We gotta do better than this if we are to push forward.
@jalcine Aight, cool. Hopefully will get better because this isn't a great start.
There are some salient points about security that I absolutely agree with, but most of it just seems like editorializing.
I'd rather see problems identified and then explorations of possible ways to improve.
But I guess they're saving that for later. I hope.
Yeah I know. I just think that's a poor way of going about it.
The proliferation of AP is providing a real opportunity for us to not only think about how we communicate but more effective ways to do it, a couple of which you name, which is cool.
I'm so down w/ the protocol being changed in a way that makes it better, but saying we shouldn't be using it at all is step backwards.
Cool. I'll wait for that. I really want to see viable options. Especially if they work
That part of it is always going to be what it is, but the power of the idea is self evident based on how many good people are adopting. That's a huge plus. We can work with that. There is so much space to make AP better without kicking it in the face.
Which is why I think we'd better served to improve the spec rather than demean it.
Is it perfect? Hell no. But it's a start.
I think questions about security are worthwhile. And as the AP spec itself is not set in stone, there is room to make it better.
In light of this, I don't think jumping another protocol is the best way to move forward. There is plenty of room for improvement in AP.
I don't think we need to create a schism around AP just yet. There is space for collaboration and improvement.
Quoting from the blog: "But this will require coordination between all the vendors. And with 40+ projects out there, it's not going to be easy. And do we even care about those 40+ projects anyway?"
If we were able to coordinate that many developers, we would be able to implement all services as micro-services that complement each other. There's no reason why this would not be possible... Except ego wars.
> good coordination starts with shared understanding.
Agree. I think part of the issue is that AP 'in-the-wild' is now moving a gazillion times faster than SocialCG is moving on it, and there is no proper (or very hard to get) overview of how it is evolving.
Yesterday I created "Should activitypub.rocks rock some more?" for that reason:
(guess I now found the source of who was talking about 40 AP projects :)
This instance is provided by Petites Singularités ASBL for like-minded people in Brussels and elsewhere.
We speak English, French, Dutch.
P.S.: works with free software and grassroots activists across disciplines, ranging from agro-ecology to cartography, libre aesthetics & ethics, (self-)organization & policy.
Send donations to IBAN BE16 3630 1548 4674 (Petites Singularités ASBL) with mention “ps.s10y.eu” (and your name if and only if you want to be credited): we publish donations as we receive them, and expenses. Yearly service is expected to cost ~ 150 € (without sysadmin expenses.)
“We've got to fight the government, fight the oligarchy, fight capitalism, be internationalist and fight the empire because it's the best hope to enrich hundreds of millions of lives, and build towards a truly equitable future.”
— Abby Martin
If you have any problem with someone on this instance, thank you to flag messages appropriately and contact the staff.
As this is a federated network, we expressly forbid contents such as: spam, pornography without NSFW tag, hate speech, racism, sexism, consumerism, corporatism, and nationalism.