Yea in theory you wouldn’t need the password if you have the private key but here the key is only used for signing, maybe not for login. If it also needs to be backwards compatible. In any case, I don’t think user-held private keys is viable.
Sharing with trusted parties… I dunno, I think again it’s too technical and complicated to do it. And you’d need people on the platform you trust to already be there.
They were also plain C functions in my case, but it doesn’t take too much discipline to only call it through the struct. Also, you can put the struct in a different crate which includes the C bindings to ensure that you can’t call the C bindings without the struct.
Just use the Mutex from the parking_lot crate.
The only time I’ve ever needed a Mutex<()> so far with Rust is when I had to interop with a C library which itself was not thread safe (unprotected use of global variables), so I needed to lock the placeholder mutex each time I called one of the C functions.
Actually I think in this case you’re still better off using a Mutex with “data” inside. I’ve done this before. The idea is that you make a unit struct MyCFuncs or whatever and then you only call the C functions from methods of that unit struct. Then you can only access those methods once you lock the Mutex and get the instance of the unit struct. It feel elegant to me.
Seems very technically oriented haha. But sounds like a cool project.
How does Hubzilla work? I haven’t really heard much about it, just heard the name.
Because anyone can grab the same name, on a different platform.
That’s always the case, even for centralized platforms. Usernames are just usernames. Same thing with email. This is a fundamental problem with the internet and the solution is that celebrities and such host their own ActivityPub server (just like their own email server) or make it clear on their personal website what their own official account is somewhere else.
automated solution
On the other hand, any automated solution will be possible to work around. Such a system would be open source like the rest of Lemmy and you’d know exactly the criteria you need to live up to to avoid getting hit by the filter.
Email verification is super easy to get around. It’s practically not a barrier at all.
I’m not a native speaker so I don’t hear the fart association so much. But isn’t tooting also just what a trumpet or elephant does? In that way it makes sense. But I do think the terminology is a bit silly. Why not just “post” instead of toot? Why not just “repost” or “share” instead of “boost”? It feels a bit too much like corporate social media where every feature needs a “wacky and fun” name.
Yea I see what you mean. How do we solve this though? I mean let’s say you were to redesign the protocol from scratch. Do you just need to include all these things into the protocol from the start? That’s a lot of features and considerations to make. An extensible protocol might be for the best? But it does bring a lot of complexity… I’m really not sure.
this has historically been mastodon. and they have put themselves in such a place that anything they do not approve of gets seen as a “nonstandard extension” and anything they see gets seen as a part of the standard. see the above reply.
Yea this is problematic, especially because this pulls AP into a more microblogging-oriented direction, at the expense or at least disregard of all other use cases. I would not call this a benevolent dictator - that’s just a regular dictator.
(surprisingly, this is the second time i’m writing this exact thing today)
Where? I’d love to read more about this stuff.
I recently started looking at socialhub actually. I have even participated in that emoji reaction thread you linked, but I only joined the site recently.
Honestly, I’m a bit confused by the site. There’s kind of a lack of direction in a sense? Everyone is trying to extend the protocol in various different ways and it seems difficult to achieve alignment and agreement. I guess that is to be expected in a decentralized system but still.
you’ll find MANY threads of reasonable ideas that are in json-ld representation bikeshed hell as people unnecessarily debate over which exact json-ld representation of the same exact data is the most correctest
What’s the alternative though? I mean nobody has the authority to put their foot down and decide. I agree that the debates go on for way too long, but how else do we find alignment? Then again, the long discussions definitely exhibits a kind of selection bias - only the people who are pedantic enough to keep discussing will do so. Everyone else naturally just get tired of the whole thing and leave.
It’s weird but it almost feels like the fediverse needs a benevolent dictator to kind of get an overview and set a clearer direction, when it comes to the standards.
this bullshit ON FEATURES ACTIVELY FEDERATING RIGHT NOW, where changing it would BREAK BACKWARDS COMPATIBILITY
But these features were totally non-standard extensions right? You can’t expect such things to continue being compatible as the actual standard evolves. It would also be a neat way to strong-arm the standard - just implement an extension in the way that you want it to work and now the standard has to keep your version compatible. That wouldn’t be good. Just because there exists a non-standard implementation does not mean it should be able to dictate how stuff should be done.
Yep exactly, it also leads to Mastodon instances only seeing local likes for remote posts. You’ll never see remote likes on remote posts as they wouldn’t be sent to your instance. I honestly don’t understand how this hasn’t been a bigger problem for Mastodon, but I guess Mastodon is more about boosts and chronological timelines and less about sorting stuff based on likes.
and given this is AP, that’s gonna be a while. People seem to love bikeshedding in circles instead of doing actual work
Out of curiosity, what do you mean by this? Any examples? I’ve not followed the development of AP very much at all honestly so I don’t know the history.
(mentioning people mentioned in post because post mentions apparently do not work)
Mastodon doesn’t support groups so it’s maybe not a “bug” per se, but it is at least a missing feature.
Consider also that if Lemmy shared upvotes the same way, you would only see the upvotes on posts from your own instance, i.e. upvotes would only appear on the local feed. The all feed would be pointless and in general it would be pointless to try to sort posts across the whole fediverse, as you only receive upvotes for your local posts.
Lemmy simply would not function if it shared votes like that. So in that sense, it’s a bug kind of. And as mentioned above, I think it’s a bad way of doing it, as it encourages centralization.
Once every two minutes is plenty,
That won’t work, because it would have to be once every two minute for every single comment and post forever.
You have a point about new sort, but you could approximate it by sorting what’s known to an instance. It’s not ideal, but it’s at least something. Maybe it would make sense to push just that feed, or to fetch a subset periodically.
I have no idea what you mean by this - you can’t fetch a feed, that’s not at all how the data is organised.
If someone on Mastodon likes a post on feddit.dk, I don’t see any reason feddit.dk can’t communicate that to lemm.ee when I go look at it.
The problem is this: How does lemm.ee know that the like that feddit.dk claims is from mastodon.social actually is from mastodon.social? What prevents feddit.dk from just fabricating a like from mastodon.social? Currently there is no nice mechanism for authenticating such a forwarded like. A malicious instance could send loads of likes claiming they come from other instances.
I don’t understand why your instance seems to be rewriting the link somehow, but it shouldn’t. This happens with lemmy-ui?
The way you describe this, it sounds like it would need to work on trust a lot more than it already does. What if there’s a malicious instance actively circumventing bans, ignoring any pulbished banlist?
As for sending the post, it’s not that hard to keep track of all servers that follow a group or person or hashtag
I was talking about the scenario where you are instance A and you don’t know the followers of a user of instance B. That is not easy to keep track of, since you obviously don’t get any of the follow requests for a user on another instance.
Normal non-technical people are never going to do this. It needs to be easy as clicking a button, otherwise it will never happen for them. Again, this is a neat technical solution but it completely forgets the human.