Happy #GlobalSwitchDay
-
Absolutely, signal isn't federated, but I don't want my messaging app to be federated. I want my social media to be federated. Lemmy is good because it's open. Signal is good because it's shut.
-
I'd like to argue that using AP is an inconsistent rule for membership. For example, Diaspora has been considered to be part of the fediverse from early on, but it doesn't use AP.
I don't really know where to draw the line. AP simply isn't suitable for some applications, but it makes sense to include it for branding
-
Are we claiming now that Activity Pub is the only protocol that we can use for the fediverse? I think XMPP is roughly 30 years old at this point, and I'm pretty sure Activity Pub is much younger than that. I could be wrong though.
But regardless, I don't see why Activity Pub has to be the only protocol we accept to be considered a part of the fediverse. It's not even like different AP implementations talk to each other all that well. My understanding is that Mastodon doesn't federate that well with Lemmy, and I haven't seen Loops or Pixelfed on Lemmy yet either.
I'd be happy to be corrected on any of this though, I haven't looked too closely into exactly how AP works or how it's supposed to interoperate with different applications.
-
It took a day before I got my activation email. There was no indication on the website it was gonna take that long, but I'm guessing it's early enough that it might still require manual approval.
That said it's still very much a ghost town
-
The colors in the peertube logo are pretty hideous.
-
but I no longer believe that it is possible to build a competitive federated messenger at all.
The fact that we have a telephone system that works with separate providers contradicts this sentiment. If I want to pick up the phone and talk to my cousin's puppy in New Zealand, I can do that without creating an account on his provider's service.
I don't understand why we've forgotten this as a society. Yes, it was difficult to upgrade the phone systems over the past century, but it's worth it in my opinion. I really wish we'd start seeing government regulation that says "you should be able to talk to someone on a service without having to create an account on said service." I thought the DMA would do this, but sadly, Whatsapp still requires an account to talk to people using that service. Very disappointing.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I'm surprised this hasn't been said yet... but what I hate most about Signal is its requirement for a phone number. I don't want to be identified, and I want to be able to create multiple separate accounts with different identities if I want to.
I also hate the fact that it's a mobile-first service. Yes, there is a desktop application (and just one really crappy one at that), but it's clearly designed to revolve first and foremost around your phone and be virtually impossible to use without one. As someone who hates writing on a 3-inch screen, this is a also non-starter for me.
I understand the arguments about perfectionism, but this is too much. I'll stick with XMPP, Matrix and IRC, thanks.
-
I'm surprised this hasn't been said yet... but what I hate most about Signal is its requirement for a phone number. I don't want to be identified, and I want to be able to create multiple separate accounts with different identities if I want to.
I also hate the fact that it's a mobile-first service. Yes, there is a desktop application (and just one really crappy one at that), but it's clearly designed to revolve first and foremost around your phone and be virtually impossible to use without one. As someone who hates writing on a 3-inch screen, this is a also non-starter for me.
I understand the arguments about perfectionism, but this is too much. I'll stick with XMPP, Matrix and IRC, thanks.
It's meant to replace people's text messaging apps with .i imal barriers to entry. People's existing SMS/MMS contacts aren't stored by user account names, but by phone number.
When I added Signal to my device, I was able to open up my existing contacts and go.
-
This post did not contain any content.
-
They're horrible
-
Are we claiming now that Activity Pub is the only protocol that we can use for the fediverse? I think XMPP is roughly 30 years old at this point, and I'm pretty sure Activity Pub is much younger than that. I could be wrong though.
But regardless, I don't see why Activity Pub has to be the only protocol we accept to be considered a part of the fediverse. It's not even like different AP implementations talk to each other all that well. My understanding is that Mastodon doesn't federate that well with Lemmy, and I haven't seen Loops or Pixelfed on Lemmy yet either.
I'd be happy to be corrected on any of this though, I haven't looked too closely into exactly how AP works or how it's supposed to interoperate with different applications.
I mean, yeah... the fediverse, specifically, are AP servers, which is why we don't include diaspora for it.
It's decentralized and federated, to be sure, just not the "fediverse".
-
I'd like to argue that using AP is an inconsistent rule for membership. For example, Diaspora has been considered to be part of the fediverse from early on, but it doesn't use AP.
I don't really know where to draw the line. AP simply isn't suitable for some applications, but it makes sense to include it for branding
I don't know of anyone who include d*, accepting the tiny number of d* pods that also speak AP.
I mean, nostr is also NOT part of the fediverse, but another federated and decentralized network.
-
This post did not contain any content.
-
loops is still very early in development. people need to tamper their expectations.
-
This post did not contain any content.
-
afaik ap is not a hard requirement for being in the fediverse, matrix is often included because it has the same federation idea
-
afaik ap is no hard requirement to be considerted fediverse
-
Loops definitely needs more features but it's early. I've enjoyed it.
