@hongminhee @julian @renchap @pfefferle @mike @michael

That's an interesting idea using as:preview to carry an as:Note representation of the activity, abd would probably be pretty easy to integrate, I think?

@julian @iftas you only subscribe to one at a time, they're subsets of the same overall list.

#FediForum was fantastic, but now I think I need to sleep for a few days at least. Definitely not used to so much social interaction

@J12t @julian @andypiper perhaps off topic & more the "getting devs started", but I am working on stuff for trust & safety, it's just slow because I don't get much time to work on it. (and Julian, I've your email to reply to later this week)

@julian Webhooks have other technical issues, and like, we're doing ~50-100 API calls to your server potentially.

E.g., we need to know what blocks you have to know what blocks we should push to you.

FIRES takes a different approach in that it's pull and synchronisation based.

So @julian reminded people at #FediForum that a decade ago I made quite a number of contributions to NodeBB, but I've also been around doing open source for a long time.

e.g., WebSockets in Node.js? I'm the one who did the work to make that possible.

Moderator Notes & assigning reports in Mastodon? That was me in 2018. Same with hashtag usage prevention.

@lkanies @johnonolan @julian @hongminhee @pfefferle for big stuff, yeah, talk to the maintainers before implementing — that is consistent for any open source project.

@iftas @julian @jaz The problem with labelled lists is that you don't have information on changes; that's what FIRES is trying to solve

@julian The other big one people don't realise is that the multiple page documentation for Node.js was also actually me.

There's a reason my bio says "you've probably used code I've written"

@samsethi @evan this is why AP servers need to advertise what activities and objects they support, without this we'll almost never be able to use the full vocabulary, as everyone will choose the lowest common denominator for the platform with the most users.

@trwnh @julian @silverpill I'd only expect a Note/Article when explicitly requesting the first post in a thread/topic, not when fetching the topic itself

@oliphant @julian @fediversereport FIRES would indeed solve for a more broader user base, as we'd be able to provide a feed of changes over time to the CARIAD lists.

At present, we do not persist the actual changes to the CARIAD lists over time, we simply have a new version of the lists, and that results in the update process happening.

I am still trying to secure funding to work on FIRES.

@julian @darius oooh, this was for the ForumWG not the CG Monthly meeting that's tomorrow (4th) — https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/6b91f267-6cb4-41ca-9a67-5035cee827dd/20241004T130000/

Might be good to propose it as an announcement item there too?

@julian I'm guessing you don't get DMs? I'm in the process with NLNet, I originally thought Sovereign Tech Fund only supported existing open-source projects, but it looks like they might support a new project as well.

I'm certainly going to be applying there when applications open up again "in spring 2024”

@julian @dmitri there's not, I can help you with it tomorrow if you want? I'm free before 6pm Berlin time (an hour before the SWICG meeting), happy to jump on a call and share what I know

Either drop me an email or calendar invite with a meeting link

@jenniferplusplus @hazelnoot funnily enough, Gleason already does / is doing exactly this, because he complains that storing a public/private keypair per known account uses too much storage.

He had this blog post complaining about key storage that I saw a little while ago via someone.

@trwnh @julian @erincandescent agreed, another FEP?

Like, Renaud's proposal has nothing to do with Threads or Meta saying "hey, we've moderation tools we could maybe open up if you want them"

In fact, his proposal is still at the stage it was last year (much like FIRES), because we had to wait for funding.

And it certainly isn't favouring Meta, just enabling anyone who wants to build more advanced, possibly automated tools, for enhancing moderation teams.

It's a direct reaction to those demanding spam tooling.

”Meta's plans to offer automated moderation tools to fediverse admins“

You know these are opt-in tools being proposed, where Threads/Meta is willing to leverage it's engineering org to provide tooling to help the fediverse in some way, right?

You don't have to use said tools, you can just ignore them.

(Source: https://flipboard.video/w/2q29uCjnHjot1CHu1CZBim)

”But Mastodon also has [...] a lot on its plate including integration with Threads“

It's lines like this that makes me completely unable to take those calling for a hard fork of Mastodon seriously.

All Mastodon do for Threads is the same they for any fediverse developer having issues federating with them. (And there's certainly limits to that)

Along with perhaps writing more FEPs to standardize behaviour, which benefits *everyone*

#mastodon