rglullis

Thanks!

Maybe I wasn't too clear on the post about one thing, though. There is no need to fork the browser. I believe this could be implemented as a simple browser extension or even as Progressive Web App, like Voyager or Elk. The idea that I'm working with is actually to fork either one of these applications and just change its internal libraries to make it "speak" ActivityPub directly, instead of using Mastodon's or Lemmy's APIs.

Is there a discussion about this somewhere on the web?

Specifically about this approach, no. But https://matrix.to/#/#fediverse:pixie.town is a good room for people working in Fediverse/Social Web.

And web browsers were only meant to be a language for formatting documents, yet software engineers realized it could do a lot more than that.

It's not just because someone design things one way that automatically all other use cases become invalid. This argument makes no sense.

The site is meant to be a crowdsourced database. You can go to https://fediverser.network/instances/feddit.org and add the countries. You can do one suggestion at a time. Once it is accepted, you can make new ones.

Again... Are you people ignoring my work on purpose?

• Sign up to https://fediverser.network
• select "Find an instance"
• answer simple questions (interests, languages)
• get an instance recommendation

I know that the UX needs to improve, but it's super frustrating to see people talking about things like they are a completely novel concept.

This is an implementation detail, it's not required by any part whatsoever of the activitypub protocol.

All that AP cares about is that actors have an URL for their inboxes and outboxes. You can have even servers to serve your actor id from a different domain in your instances.

Hell, you can even have no "instance" at all. You can have just a bunch of static files to serve your webfinger queries and bio and even the outbox, regardless of the username that you have.

I think it's fine to have people trying to use a simplified mental model to understand new concepts. But it becomes a problem when people start taking these mental models and try to justify their opinions on incomplete abstractions.

How is that an answer to my question?

Oh, I guess I'll bite...

If ads are not acceptable ever, please tell me how you think people should be supported.

• Crowdfunding is not enough.
• The culture is to reject any type of business, even when it's a small mom-and-pop shop, or an indie dev.
• Co-ops could work, but (usually) require some level of affinity between the members (e.g: people from the same geographical region or artists working on some specific style/school) or they require some rich benefactor to bootstrap the venture.

Unless you are expecting people to just provide you free content forever, what do you suggest?

I honestly do not get it. Look at the pinned post: "Creating a new community is easy, but to get people on board, you need to create some content."

Please, let's not get into this habit of creating communities without having any clear purpose. It only makes things look even deader than they already are.

I use Sponsorblock, enjoy it, and promote it whenever appropriate... but do we really a whole community for that? What do you want to talk about it there?

Am I a joke to you?

That is the main thing, yes, but it would also allow for better coordination among the instances for migration efforts. "Fediversed" Instances can keep of redditors that migrated, can have more attributes to display for people when selecting a instance, can accept or reject a Redditor based on certain criteria (e.g, account is too new, or was flagged as a spammer, or is posting a language different from the main language in the server, etc)

I am not following. What rules do you think are being changed?