I am by no means knowledgeable on the subject, so the suggestion might seems weird, but I would love it to be lass "arborescent" in its structure. I would love a single "child" item to have multiple "parents". And that applies to :
User toward instances : a single user could be signed up in multiple instances that would mirror posts. As long as both instances allow it of course. That would allow to be present in multiple local timeline, and have some redundancy. That would also allow multiple peertube instances to host the same video, to help with the load when mutual seeding is missing.
Posts toward users. To allow multiple users to sign the same post would be great. It is to be quite different from a simple boost since there is no "OP". Articles, music or even video can be made by multiple persons that don't necessarily group up for a long time, so it does not justify the creation of a common identity like a music groups.
Combinaison of the two above : Post toward instances. A user belonging to two instances can either post to one, the other, or both. Then, this post is mirrored to both instances.
Comment/response toward post. This might seem weird. But being able make a single comment concerning multiple precedent posts can allow to make pertinent connection between subject and people.
In general, I think it is very difficult to think ahead about what uses people will find. So I think we should assume as little as possible and keep the uses as large as possible.
The things we refer to as “threads” are actually “branches of a tree”. [...] It would be useful if a discussion branch was not only shaped like a thread, but also had the usefulness of one : sewing, or tying together different discussion topics.
This post was about the "Comment/response toward post.". I also like your "Posts toward users. ". Coauthoring is definitely valuable ! Relatedly, one could imagine a channel (like on Peertube) owned by several users. Then the channel could publish their common work.
use cryptography, for decentralized identities and content addressability.
the "fediverse" is ostensibly decentralized but that actually just means it has more single points of failure than the centralized model it is attempting to replace. (a failure doesn't necessarily take the whole thing down, but, "federated" generally means there are more people and systems which could individually prevent information from flowing from point A to B; eg, I can't message someone on another server if my server is down or if their server is down.)
Secure Scuttlebutt has a much better data model but is doing other things wrong so I haven't used it much. Maybe Twitter's Bluesky thing will produce something good, but I'm not holding my breath. What is clear is that ActivityPub is not a good long-term answer (but it is fun today).
Activitypub and Secure Scuttlebutt use entirely different technologies, and thus have different advantages and disadvantages. For now its just a fact that SSB has gained a lot less popularity, for inherent lack of user experience, in my opinion. Its just so much easier to create an account on a website, everyone online can do that. No need to install anything.
I dont think there is anything wrong with Activitypub. Some things need to be more specified (eg groups), but that will happen naturally over time as implementations converge. You just have to keep in mind what the protocol is, and what problems it can solve. Its basically a low-level protocol for communication between http servers, or essentially an api. Many of the problems that you think of in Activitypub are caused by specific implementations (mastodon), or lack of development/design. There are many more possibilities with Activitypub which havent been tried in practice.
down daemon
in reply to Roslavets • • •like this
Alfenstein, davidlunadeleon, y78fpXvK8Zxz, sexy_peach, Dochyo, ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆, marmulak and erpicht like this.
don't like this
nachtigall and Arthur Besse don't like this.
PP44
in reply to Roslavets • • •User toward instances : a single user could be signed up in multiple instances that would mirror posts. As long as both instances allow it of course. That would allow to be present in multiple local timeline, and have some redundancy. That would also allow multiple peertube instances to host the same video, to help with the load when mutual seeding is missing.
Posts toward users. To allow multiple users to sign the same post would be great. It is to be quite different from a simple boost since there is no "OP". Articles, music or even video can be made by multiple persons that don't necessarily group up for a long time, so it does not justify the creation of a common identity like a music groups.
Combinaison of the two above : Post toward instances. A user belonging to two instances can either post to one, the other, or both. Then, this post is mirrored to both instances.
Comment/response toward post. This might seem weird. But being able make a single comment concerning multiple precedent posts can allow to make pertinent connection between subject and people.
In general, I think it is very difficult to think ahead about what uses people will find. So I think we should assume as little as possible and keep the uses as large as possible.
like this
sizerz, Adda, nachtigall, y78fpXvK8Zxz and graphito like this.
Liwott
in reply to PP44 • •like this
y78fpXvK8Zxz and PP44 like this.
nutomic
in reply to Liwott • • •erpicht likes this.
nutomic
in reply to PP44 • • •erpicht likes this.
PP44
in reply to nutomic • • •nutomic likes this.
Arthur Besse
in reply to Roslavets • • •the "fediverse" is ostensibly decentralized but that actually just means it has more single points of failure than the centralized model it is attempting to replace. (a failure doesn't necessarily take the whole thing down, but, "federated" generally means there are more people and systems which could individually prevent information from flowing from point A to B; eg, I can't message someone on another server if my server is down or if their server is down.)
Secure Scuttlebutt has a much better data model but is doing other things wrong so I haven't used it much. Maybe Twitter's Bluesky thing will produce something good, but I'm not holding my breath. What is clear is that ActivityPub is not a good long-term answer (but it is fun today).
"Mastodon" is a fitting name for something that is large, cumbersome, and ultimately an evolutionary dead-end - Lemmy
lemmy.mllike this
Kilgore Trout, Adda, nachtigall, y78fpXvK8Zxz, sexy_peach, rrg and sizerz like this.
nutomic
in reply to Arthur Besse • • •Arthur Besse likes this.
Lemmy sucks
in reply to Roslavets • • •like this
y78fpXvK8Zxz and sizerz like this.
nutomic
in reply to Lemmy sucks • • •nutomic
in reply to Roslavets • • •like this
Liwott and erpicht like this.