@BeAware I have not gone over the details, but to the best of my knowledge Authorized Fetch is just the name Mastodon uses for a similar mechanism to what I'm doing in FedBOX. In their case I think they don't allow any C2S get request on collections if they're not authorized, in mine I just filter out non Public activities/objects.
But, I'm pretty sure that my work on having the collections filtered based on recipients predates Mastodon's by quite some time. :P
I often struggle with working on non-trivial, long standing projects because when I sit down to do the work after some hiatus, I can't seem to find the pain points I wanted to fix quickly enough.
It feels like trying to get a bandaid off when you can't find an edge where it comes unstuck easily enough.
The largest piece of bandaid that I wasn't able to get unstuck from the ActivityPub adjacent work is getting the HTTP-signatures working well with the rest of the fediverse (by which I mean Mastodon).
Today I might have got the corner of another little bit of bandaid unstuck which hopefully will help in the long run.
@BeAware federating between instances should have nothing to do with it.
Dan is presenting a feature where a user views another profile and then they can see mutuals. This can be done if Mastodon would load *all* the information (including follower list) about the profile when you view it from your own instance, instead of relying only on data that has been previously federated.
It's a *trivial* feature that Mastodon is lacking, and I feel like that's what the toot you quoted complains about.
@BeAware I think you misunderstand the problem. The ActivityPub specification encourages implementations to expose a followers/following collections on actors. Those collections have a TotalItems property in them which should allow anyone to see the count.
@hongminhee I think it's dangerous to think about Activities as distinct from "objects". My intuition tells me that the basic difference between an Activity object and a regular Object is that Activities inform some side-effect on the receiving server/client side. But both types can hold information that can make sense independently.
Another example to a Question would be a Flag activity that has Content (where a user would put the reason on why they effected the Flag).
@hongminhee I see, but is that safe to disseminate as part of a library? Meaning that multiple developers will be making use of those services through - what I assume to be - your account.
@hongminhee I like the part of "spinning up a temporary ActivityPub server", but how does that work? The key needs to be reachable from the internet, so DNS and such must be already set up.
@agates probably it would be useful for the people in the back to state who is the "us" that you're representing. And also what does "has chosen not to work with" actually mean?
Mostly a programmer.Implementing #ActivityPub in the #Go programming language.Current projects: * #GoActivityPub - a library to use ActivityPub in Go. * #FedBOX - a generic ActivityPub service supporting the client to server API. * #brutalinks - a link aggregator inspired by (old) reddit, hacker news and lobste.rs built on top of FedBOX. * #oni - a single user ActivityPub server with minimal fuss.My posts are mostly related to ActivityPub and web development.