@zatnosk @activitypubblueskybridge @fedidevs @fediversenews I might be missing something, I don’t follow how this is different to the Fediverse today. Any new server can access & federate from any other, unless the user or the server blocks it (unless I’ve misunderstood!) Wouldn’t this be the same for fed.brid.gy? (But you can *also* use the hashtag in your profile)
Conversation
Notices
-
Embed this notice
JP (byjp@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 13-Feb-2024 06:09:08 JST 
JP
- AP-AT-Bridge Group repeated this.
-
Embed this notice
Blake Leonard (blake@infosec.town)'s status on Tuesday, 13-Feb-2024 06:09:12 JST 
Blake Leonard
@byjp @zatnosk @activitypubblueskybridge @fedidevs @fediversenews I think the main difference is that, like Nostr, Bluesky is just one big monolith with known problematic users (that have to be "filtered" out), so it's hard to moderate effectively. It's the same as any other large Mastodon instance, like dot Social or Gab.
AP-AT-Bridge Group repeated this. -
Embed this notice
JP (byjp@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 13-Feb-2024 06:09:23 JST
JP
@blake @zatnosk @activitypubblueskybridge @fedidevs @fediversenews Ahh yeah, I guess some users/servers might want/need to block the whole of brid.gy to avoid the risk of specific users on a given bridged platform being able to follow them. That’s not so different to today’s fediverse (lots of people/servers block Threads), but it sucks to lose the other functionality of brid.gy.
AP-AT-Bridge Group repeated this. -
Embed this notice
JP (byjp@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 13-Feb-2024 06:09:25 JST
JP
@blake @zatnosk @activitypubblueskybridge @fedidevs @fediversenews (Unless you can block specific bridges platforms individually @snarfed.org ? This still seems within the limits of current Fediverse architecture to me, but it’d be a shame if we can’t allow people to select platforms by server, just like with the Fediverse!)
AP-AT-Bridge Group repeated this. -
Embed this notice
Blake Leonard (blake@infosec.town)'s status on Tuesday, 13-Feb-2024 06:09:43 JST
Blake Leonard
@byjp @zatnosk @activitypubblueskybridge @fedidevs @fediversenews @snarfed@hachyderm.io If you want to block just Bridgy's Bluesky bridge, or just their (upcoming) Nostr bridge, or whatever, you can do that. If you want to block specific PDS's, I don't think there's a way to do that.
-
Embed this notice
SuperMoosie (supermoosie@mastodon.au)'s status on Tuesday, 13-Feb-2024 13:11:26 JST 
SuperMoosie
@byjp
The difference is it is a commercial network. We have not signed up to the TOS AND he is copying everything with out permission from the user.We did sign up just to the fediverse, not to make content for a billionaire.
If people want to post elsewhere they can sign up for the TOS.
It needs to be OPT IN If people want to use it.
AP-AT-Bridge Group repeated this. -
Embed this notice
Kay Ohtie (kayohtie@blimps.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 13-Feb-2024 13:13:02 JST 
Kay Ohtie
Considering each instance can have its own terms of service, this is a legal space that is largely untested currently. My thoughts are that the legality will boil down to "follow each instance terms", but it's an amazingly complex thing even there. And I say this even as an instance owner who thinks that bridgy should be explicitly opt-in either per-post, per-user, or per-instance.
Per-instance, to me, kind of makes the MOST sense for having an 'opt-out' tag in the bio -- each instance owner is then making their own users aware of the policy and can give them advance notice if they don't wish to be included. Just having a global "we can have your information even if you're unaware of it" policy is half the problem of the current tech industry snarfing up damn everything as if it's theirs to use, causing all the LLM garbage issues today.
Hell, the fact I'd have to end my wifi SSID in _at least_ two weird tag things, and one of them MUST be the last one, to avoid my wifi SSID, BSSID, and location getting snarfed by mapping cars (google, MS, etc) is just part of this. I have to take up limited characters in my bio for each service I want no part in? I have to make my SSID ugly just so a corp won't use info I didn't consent to them using? While I like the idea of being able to follow friends of mine who are on AT instead of fedi, and refuse to use fedi, it's not worth it being so open; I always figured there would be an opt-in mechanism, not yet more opt-out stuff.
C'mon like, haven't we seen how many times people offering only opt-out are shown the distaste for this? =/ 'bridge' or not, it's still technically a specialized service, it's not transparent just because things are duplicated both ways.
AP-AT-Bridge Group repeated this. -
Embed this notice
Sam :verified: (sam@urbanists.social)'s status on Tuesday, 13-Feb-2024 13:13:21 JST 
Sam :verified:
@SuperMoosie @byjp @zatnosk @activitypubblueskybridge @fedidevs @fediversenews There are several commercial Fediverse networks that you have not opted into, but that your posts can be sent to (via boosts, replies, etc.). Please shut the fuck up and leave this developer alone. This is embarrassing.
-
Embed this notice
DavidB (davidbhimself@firefish.city)'s status on Tuesday, 13-Feb-2024 19:05:55 JST 
DavidB
@SuperMoosie@mastodon.au @byjp@hachyderm.io @zatnosk@mastodon.art @activitypubblueskybridge@venera.social @fedidevs@venera.social @fediversenews@venera.social I did not consent to the TOS of your instance and yet, it's copying this post so that you can see it. And guess what, you did not consent to the TOS of my server and yet, it has copied your post and basic info so that I can see them.
-
Embed this notice
shiri (shiri@foggyminds.com)'s status on Wednesday, 14-Feb-2024 12:42:44 JST
shiri
@KayOhtie @SuperMoosie @byjp @zatnosk legal space is simple, TOS only applies to the service you're using. You're not using Bluesky, you're not using my instance.
For a TOS to apply you have to accept it in some fashion, most of these sites do this by either a passive "if you continue to use this site you implicitly accept the TOS" (and that can only reasonably apply while you're actively browsing the site, not for relayed fediverse messages) or a "to create an account you have to accept the TOS".
It's the same legal grounds as whether or not Yahoo's terms of service apply when I email someone who has a Yahoo account.
It's also a woefully flawed argument to assume that the loudest voices represent the majority. The majority don't care and the backlash just goes more to show the toxicity of Mastodon culture (and I mean Mastodon here, not ActivityPub)
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the