Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Emelia 👸🏻 (thisismissem@hachyderm.io)'s status on Tuesday, 20-Feb-2024 05:58:47 JST Emelia 👸🏻

   in reply to

   • Renaud Chaput
   • Ryan Barrett

   @snarfed.org for plugins, I'd probably say that they're not directly the answer? But it's complicated.

   E.g., rather than building for one platform, can we build for many around a common interface? I know @renchap is working on a proposal around this notion for Mastodon.

   PeerTube does support plugins of some kind, but I'm not sure on the details.

   • Embed this notice
     Ryan Barrett (snarfed.org@fed.brid.gy)'s status on Tuesday, 20-Feb-2024 05:58:52 JST Ryan Barrett
     Add-on is an interesting idea, but I'm not familiar with any fediverse servers that support plugins. Are you? I know eg Mastodon doesn't.

     If they did, I'd have to maintain a bunch of different plugins, one for each server I want to support, across all of their different languages and plugin frameworks and APIs, on top with the bridge code itself. Not nearly as feasible as the current plan of integrating at the protocol level, and making the bridge just another instance, and bridged users normal fediverse users, so that users and admins can limit/block both users and the bridge as a whole like normal.

     And yes! Bluesky moderation labels are great, I think that framework probably has more long term potential than the fediverse's current instance limit/block approach. @thisismissem is working along similar lines with her FIRES and Fedicheck (for IFTAS) projects.

     Moderation labels don't really translate well to hashtags specifically, but the bridge will absolutely support Bluesky labels in general. The Bluesky team's AppView already filters out most of them (including all objectionable ones) by default, and that happens upstream of the bridge.

     @GrahamDowns

     Tim Chambers repeated this.