#WhereIsMySurprisedFace
-
@serapath Have a strong standard that doesn't allow for such extensions. I've been saying that since many years.
-
@jwildeboer
But even if you had a strong standard.
Isnt the point that https://codeberg.org/fediverse/fep/src/branch/main still collaborates with W3C?Hope it stays independent enough and will be able to protect against these kinds of attacks
-
@jwildeboer
Why aren't we blocking threads already?
What are we waiting for?
#fediblock #fedipact -
-
@Felipe_B @jwildeboer Because @Gargron is so naive he though this would never happen.
-
In my experience it's not only @Gargron . Otherwise more of the rest of Fedi would at least have defederated (and possibly enabled authorized fetch).
-
-
Yes, as co-facilitator of #FEP, that is the point. Highly in favor of a bottom-up 3-phase standards process designed to guarantee an open ecosystem and tech landscape. Wrote a bunch about that on #SocialHub:
3-Stage Standards Process: Guaranteeing an open and decentralized ecosystem
Open ecosystem, open ecosystem, open ecosystem In various channels where the Standards Process is discussed there’s mention of a 2-stage structure that goes like: FEP → W3C. As I proposed many times before (like here, a…
SocialHub (socialhub.activitypub.rocks)
Yet it is hard.. as it happens and in typical grassroots social dynamics, everyone tends to care most about their own shop.
Much to the benefit of any large corporation practicing EE or #EEE, I should add. Meta is already king.
-
@jwildeboer I’m honestly ok with some of the ideas outlined in that interview.
Content monetization is a topic that has been floating around on #ActivityPub implementations long before Zuck’s helpers considered playing with it.
@dansup already toyed with the idea a year ago.
@Techaltar recently also brought up the topic in his series of Fediverse interviews.
And creators like @thelinuxEXP have mentioned multiple times that the lack of financial incentives to post their content on e.g. PeerTube vs. YouTube acts as a deterrent for many.
And the Fediverse community in general has already a strong sense of “reward-based” ethics - many already make LibrePay/Patreon donations to their instance admins and favourite content creators, so why not embed such ability in the protocol itself and bypass the middlemen?
Allowing micropayments in ActivityPub (per-post, one-off, recurrent etc.) would actually attract many creators who are currently stuck against their will on proprietary platforms, are at the mercy of YouTube’s mercurial monetization algorithms, don’t have much freedom in deciding how they want to get paid, and have to give back a non-negligible share of their revenue to the platform itself.
Imagine instead a world where micropayments are handled at protocol level itself, a piece of content or a profile that requires the user to make a payment would transparently respond with an HTTP 402, the money would move from the donor’s account to the contributor’s without any middlemen to shave off profits, no external algorithms are in charge of what can be monetized and how, and creators don’t even have to worry about posting the same content across multiple different platforms because ActivityPub would take care of the whole distribution problem. I can’t think of a better silver bullet to get content creators to do the jump.
The thing is that if we don’t implement this right on the protocol level because we oppose commercialization on ideological grounds, then Threads may implement it anyway on their version of ActivityPub (and then yes, it’d really be E-E-E), and content creators who do content creation as a job have one more reason to avoid the Fediverse.
I’ve got a bit more of a mixed feeling about ads instead. There’s sensitivity on the Fediverse about donations and micropayments, but almost everyone here hates the ad-based business model to the core. If the payments idea and implementation works right, then I don’t think we need to pollute our walls with such low-quality littering. I’m happy to leave that to Threads if they want to implement it, because I really don’t see much of added value in it and I don’t see why anybody out there would like that idea.
-
@fabio @Techaltar @dansup @jwildeboer Yeah, honestly, if there was an easy way to support me on PeerTube, I would much likely promote that first instead of YouTube. I would at least try to push PeerTube first for a while to see if that worked out.
Same for the podcast on Castopos, I would invest more time and effort on it if it could easily be user supported without having to mention Patreon in each episode.
-
@thelinuxEXP @fabio @Techaltar @dansup @jwildeboer What would you see in PeerTube? We have a `Support` field in channels & videos (video field inherits channel's one). A `Support` button is displayed below the video player
-
@Chocobozzz @fabio @Techaltar @dansup @jwildeboer It’s just a link to another payment system, with no integrations inside of Peertube though (unless I’m mistaken?)
Something like financially subscribing to a channel to get members-only content, or just setting up a « each time I watch a video from this person, I want to pay 1 cent automatically » sort of preference, these types of things
-
@thelinuxEXP @fabio @Techaltar @dansup @jwildeboer Okay I understand! A system directly integrated in PeerTube. Thanks for your feedback!
-
@Chocobozzz @thelinuxEXP @Techaltar @dansup @jwildeboer I would add that any implementation of a payment subsystem should probably be done at protocol level, so individual implementations of #ActivityPub don’t have to reinvent the wheel - doing #payments right is a hard problem, and it doesn’t make sense to fragment the efforts by solving the same problem multiple times on Mastodon/WriteFreely/PeerTube/Pixelfed etc.
The payments subsystem should be better integrated in the ActivityPub ecosystem compared to a “Donate here” link that redirects to a 3rd-party provider. This is probably the right chance of giving the HTTP 402 code the implementation it deserves.
I left the payments industry a few years ago so I’m not sure of what open solutions and protocols are in the market that could be already leveraged, but maybe something like OpenPayments could be a good starting point - there are many efforts on the open banking standards lately, with different degree of maturity, and IMHO a good implementation of payments over ActivityPub could be a great driver for adoption.
I’ve got the feeling that if we don’t do this right then Threads could scoop up this chance for an “embrace” to “extend” pivot.
-
@fabio @Chocobozzz @Techaltar @dansup @thelinuxEXP @jwildeboer
Nice, I will add #OpenPayments to my huge backlog on the delightful #funding curated list: https://codeberg.org/teaserbot-labs/delightful-funding/issues/1
(part of https://delightful.club).
Btw, yesterday there was a great #LibrePlanet talk by Iván Alejandro on #GNU #Taler and it was quite impressive as a Libre payment system.
The @Taler is supported by the new @NGI_Taler program.
-
@smallcircles @fabio @Chocobozzz @Techaltar @dansup @thelinuxEXP @jwildeboer
GNU @Taler is free software, and @NGI_Taler has open calls to let you implement the payment system for your free software. It would totally make sense to apply at protocol level to solve it for #ActivityPub federation.
You can see that https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/search?q=taler draws some results, and the #SocialHub is actually federated with the TALER Integration Community Hub. Hint! Hint!
Next deadline is June 1st...
-
@project1enigma @Ooze @Felipe_B @jwildeboer @Gargron I just gotta ask, you know that some would consider Authorized Fetch as part of the "Extend"...it's Mastodon proprietary.️
Other Fedi projects have already had to change their code to start adapting to mastodon.