Back

@mike,

As you know, this goes on, and on, and on with platforms that assume they control a monopoly.

The only way to avert these disasters is via proper exploitation of loose-coupling that's been delivered on a platter by the #Web.

Right now, I am a little concerned about #Mastodon #API overshadowing the #ActivityPub protocol re loose-coupling of clients and severs across the #Fediverse.

Most think this is okay, but we've seen this movie before++

@kidehen Totally. The #Mastodon #API gave us a bit of a jump start with our integration but we are committed to integrating at the protocol level. It's interesting to learn about the pros and cons of the API approach vs. the protocol approach.

@mike,

Yep.

Open protocols are the ultimate protection against inevitable compromise.

Only implementing a part of the #ActivityPub protocol weakens the #Fediverse as an open #SocialMedia collective comprising loosely-coupled clients and servers.

/cc @Mastodon

@kidehen I agree with you. [edited]

It's not sustainable to build a new social graph around every type of experience.

We should have apps that create activities that go into one social graph, and that draw on that one social graph.

@mike you should keep building on the API. I think it's the right move.

Eventually we'll have a more standard API, the ActivityPub client API, and you can use that standard one or the Mastodon one or both.

@evan @kidehen The ActivityPub Client API sounds interesting. Is this actually underway?

@mike @kidehen it is a part of the AP spec, but not implemented by Mastodon, so not widely used.

@evan @mike @kidehen fwiw pleroma implements C2S in case anyone wants to try it out.

also: this is the issue for implementing that on mastodon https://github.com/mastodon/mastodon/issues/10520