Notices by Julian Fietkau (julian@fietkau.social), page 2

@silverpill Is that your work? Thanks!

Still, it makes me think even more that we should have some sort of software project × FEP matrix for implementation status info that's more easily editable by anyone (wiki-style?) and not solely reliant on the FEP authors keeping the implementation list up to date. Something like https://correct.webfinger-canary.fietkau.software/#implementation-status but collaborative.

@pfefferle @evan @darius “We've heard your criticisms about JSON-LD loud and clear, so today the Working Group is proud to announce...” 😇

@dansup Thank you Dan!

I expect little to no breaking changes between the GTS docs and the FEP. Some added behavior for thread backfilling via replies collections, and guidance for treating existing replies if an interaction policy changes. It's mostly common sense stuff (I think, perhaps arrogantly). Things like “if the interaction policy is manual, all replies without approval stamps should be hidden” go out the window if you allow people to edit their interaction policies.

@django @nlnet

@django @nlnet @dansup The FEP for GTS-style comment controls will be coming from me. 👋 Hopefully in the next few weeks. If you scroll down my replies on my profile you can find scattered remarks on progress and remaining work items. There is a Matrix chat - if you want an invite to it, let me know!

@liaizon @dalias It's strange because the quote authorization on your post seems to resolve just fine. The URI is https://piefed.zip/quote_boost_auth?stamp=https%3A%2F%2Fpiefed.zip%2Fc%2Fprivacy%2Fp%2F1136724%2Fdiscord-cuts-ties-with-peter-thiel-backed-verification-software-after-its-code-was-found-t;https%3A%2F%2Fsocial.wake.st%2Fusers%2Fliaizon%2Fstatuses%2F116128410011052563 which at 267 characters is >255 in length, maybe that has some significance with how Mastodon handles object IDs?

@dalias @liaizon And now I'll try again, but with a post that has a slightly shorter URI.

https://piefed.zip/c/privacy/p/1131286/we-say-no-to-big-tech-mass-snooping-on-our-messages

@dalias @liaizon Okay, the length of the URI is probably not the reason. This authorization at https://piefed.zip/quote_boost_auth?stamp=https%3A%2F%2Fpiefed.zip%2Fc%2Fprivacy%2Fp%2F1131286%2Fwe-say-no-to-big-tech-mass-snooping-on-our-messages;https%3A%2F%2Ffietkau.social%2Fusers%2Fjulian%2Fstatuses%2F116128620152439918 is only 227 characters.

@dalias @liaizon Wait, I think it's the server config at piefed.zip after all. If I try to request https://piefed.zip/quote_boost_auth?stamp=https%3A%2F%2Fpiefed.zip%2Fc%2Fprivacy%2Fp%2F1136724%2Fdiscord-cuts-ties-with-peter-thiel-backed-verification-software-after-its-code-was-found-t;https%3A%2F%2Fsocial.wake.st%2Fusers%2Fliaizon%2Fstatuses%2F116128410011052563 as application/activity+json via curl, I get an HTTP error 500. I can't think of a good reason why, but there must be something goofy going on there. Do we know their server admin @liaizon, would they want a ping about this?

@dalias @liaizon ... or maybe not? I'm actually seeing the same behavior on piefed.social. Hey @rimu, what is the content negotiation doing on this route? Shouldn't this be going through? I hope I'm not so tired that I've missed a typo or something?

curl -H "Accept: application/activity+json" -v https://piefed.social/quote_boost_auth?stamp=https%3A%2F%2Fexample.com;https%3A%2F%2Fexample.com

@dalias @liaizon No, the authorization URI resolves correctly so there is nothing wrong with Liaizon's post and nothing an edit would do. The verification is between our respective servers and piefed.zip. Unless that server was coincidentally down at the moment our servers received the post, the reason is something else.

The quoting server receives an Accept activity directly from the origin, everyone else checks the authorization URI. I think it's some failure to ingest the auth object.

@dalias @liaizon I mean, we can try again here in the replies. Not like Piefed charges per quote. If it was indeed some form of short-term outage, this one should work for you.

https://piefed.zip/c/privacy/p/1136724/discord-cuts-ties-with-peter-thiel-backed-verification-software-after-its-code-was-found-t

@mcc In practice, it varies a lot. In theory, I have seen different people come to different conclusions based on the RFCs involved.

Related discussion:
https://github.com/swicg/activitypub-webfinger/issues/9
https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2024/02/internationalise-the-fediverse/

@evan @julian@activitypub.space @smallcircles Mind if I butt in here with a question about management of the `replies` collection? I'm looking at this for the interaction controls FEP draft.

GoToSocial currently broadcasts an `Accept(Note)` to let followers know a reply has been accepted (see https://docs.gotosocial.org/en/latest/federation/interaction_controls/#broadcasting-accepts-for-the-benefit-of-third-servers). We'd want to add an inverse for revocation, which would be `Undo(Accept(Note))` imo.

I feel `Add` and `Remove` on the `replies` collection may be more idiomatic and, in a sense, easier. Opinions?

RE: https://mastodon.social/@ricmac/115691254009259024

Engelbart's demo is well worth checking out. SRI has a nice 5 minute highlight cut: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6rKUf9DWRI

Xerox PARC developers cite him as a direct inspiration for the Xerox Star (http://toastytech.com/guis/star.html) and Alto, which in turn famously inspired Apple and Microsoft.

In the other direction, the chain goes to Vannevar Bush's Memex (https://history-computer.com/products/memex-guide/), and from there to early 20th century concepts such as Paul Otlet's Répertoire bibliographique universel: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%A9pertoire_bibliographique_universel

@apps As experienced client devs, I assume you have the infrastructure for OAuth already in place? I'd rather go to your website and authenticate my Mastodon account there than have a hashtag in my bio... the Tootfinder hashtag kinda annoys me every time I see it. 😐

That aside, I believe Mastodon is going to introduce some kind of profile signal for willingness to appear in starter packs, might be worth additionally keeping an eye on whatever happens there. https://github.com/mastodon/featured_collections

@dansup @dumpsterqueer Yeah, the version of the page I linked above still has the WIP warning, but I'm told everything is stable now. I suppose I should have linked here: https://docs.gotosocial.org/en/latest/federation/interaction_controls/

There are some details to be figured out (as you can see in the other replies) but I'm generally a fan of the approach.

I'll ping you again when the FEP is available!

@dansup Great! Will this be using GTS's vocabulary? https://docs.gotosocial.org/en/stable/federation/interaction_policy/ That would be cool.

I have volunteered for the task of turning their spec into a FEP (with the GTS team's permission) and I hope to get that done within a week or two. Would be amazing to convene on one approach, to increase the likelihood of larger projects also joining in.

@silverpill Speaking for PieFed (less familiar with the others), the private communities it just introduced are limited to members of one server.

What I think @liaizon is getting at is ActivityPub groups that you can join and leave and post "into" from any server, such that any member can see everything in the group, and non-members can see none of the contents.

Can Friendica do that? It wouldn't surprise me, but I haven't tried it.

@pfefferle @julian@activitypub.space FWIW, the way I handle this in @encyclia is to edit the post content to something to the effect of “This content is no longer available” instead of actually deleting the object. Mastodon (and other) servers may let people see what used to be there if they dig into the version history, but for the type of content Encyclia touches, this is generally not much of a problem.

But if you want to push for better `Undo(Delete)` support in the ecosystem, you have my axe! 🪓

@incise Nice, great progress!

@weekinfediverse Is this on your radar?