@trwnh @thisismissem @pfefferle @hongminhee @julian @renchap @mike @michael icon, image can help too.

@erincandescent @darius i think this could be solved by declaring specific endpoints for these things. no reason it should ever reach my inbox unless it's meant for my attention.

@trwnh @darius I guess that's where I think your inbox is your actors inbox but not necessarily "your" inbox

Things like Update and Delete activities aren't really for your attention; they're just for endpoint synchronisation

@erincandescent @julian @mike @hongminhee @thisismissem @pfefferle @trwnh @michael @renchap In pump.io, we divided the inbox stream between "major" (new content, new shares) which is shown in a home timeline interface and "minor" (everything else) streams which are shown like notifications. Your scrobbles should be notifications and should be silenceable by the recipient.

@erincandescent @darius if the actor represents me, then it is "my" inbox.

the correct solution imo is to spin up more bespoke actors. i'd really like to build upon the concept of "programmable actors", i.e., actors that are automated to act a certain way with activities they receive in their inbox. for example, a Relay could be defined as a programmable actor that Announces the object of any Create it receives, or Announces any activity it receives, or whatever. and it should be a JSON-LD type

@trwnh @darius you want more actors, I want less actors

This, obviously, means war

@trwnh @erincandescent @darius neat! The https://github.com/evanp/bots-rodeo/ platform is supposed to do just that.

@trwnh @darius more specifically if *I* have multiple actors I want to it be around multiple facets of myself, not dictated by technological constraints or similar

@darius @trwnh I don't even like that I need to have an alt. We have Google+ esque circles in the protocol, I should be asleep to use them

(And don't get me started on the fact that replies to my followers only posts get addressed to the replying person's followers)

@trwnh @jenniferplusplus @erincandescent @julian @mike @hongminhee @thisismissem @michael @renchap

ActivityPubSubHubbub!

@erincandescent @darius I think I'll win the war because I have more actors on my side

@erincandescent @darius I will not stop until ActivityPub is a turing-complete computing platform

@trwnh @erincandescent turing completion considered harmful

@erincandescent @darius This! Let me create Collections that represent arbitrary subsets of my followers. Let me address them. Stupid sharedInbox makes this "inefficient", though.

@darius @erincandescent *me reading that activitypub uses actors and an actor model* ah so i can spin up an actor for every object in my object-oriented design program that runs on the ActivityPub Virtual Machine. i love being a computer scientist

@julian for all its discussions and arguments about issues with interop in activitypub, the upside is that this discussion is all happening on an actual-to-god forum, with everyone participation via their microblogging account.

browsing the thread from the nodebb interface is soo different than via your microblogging interface

@darius @erincandescent actually isn't this more or less what spritely goblins is for

@laurenshof@indieweb.social yes, there are pros and cons (but mostly pros!)

The one con is that microblogging tends to encourage a more bush-like tree, with many separate conversations that can trace their lineage back to a root node. A forum with a linear interface can and does struggle at times with that use-case.

The solution is, of course, to fork out a subset of the conversation into a new topic/context, but there is currently no as:Fork activity, and therefore no support *sheds tear*

@trwnh @erincandescent dark magic that I leave to Christine

@thisismissem @trwnh @julian @pfefferle @manton @samsethi @renchap @andypiper Beware those stop gap solutions that become permanent instead of temporary in nature.