Bluesky, which uses it, has been opened to federation now, and the standard basically just looks better than ActivityPub. Has anyone heard about a project to make a Lemmy-style "link aggregator" service on it?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] jackalope@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

The move activity ain't a great solution. We need federated identity or else ux will continue to lag. When I want to move servers, I can set the move activity but there's no guarantee my followers will subscribe to the new account. It's bad ux. Mass adoption is not going to happen with that kind of flow.

Activity Pods is cool bit not implemented on mastodon.

[–] rglullis@communick.news 2 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

We need federated identity or else ux will continue to lag

What I am saying is that the ActivityPub protocol is inherently built towards a server-centric system, where identities are owned by the server. Go read the spec: even the "Client-to-Server" specification assumes that the server owns the keys and dictates that the client (i.e, users) must do everything through the API provided by the server (i.e, the client's outbox).

Anything that is built with a design where the client owns the keys may even be able to interoperate with ActivityPub, but is not ActivityPub.

Activity Pods is cool bit not implemented on mastodon.

It's the other way around. We shouldn't be looking for "Mastodon on ActivityPods", but "ActivityPods applications that can talk with Mastodon servers", and those do exist.