NodeBB

@natalie yeah i don’t fully agree with all their decisions but i understand why they made themvirtual host support would probably be quite feasible to retrofit onto existing fedi codebases but i doubt it’ll get done anytime soon

@trwnh do you have something particular in mind?

people really misunderstand the "80-20 rule" a lot, i'm realizing. it's got nothing to do with "doing 80% of the work" or "covering 80% of the use cases". the 80-20 rule (pareto principle) is that 80% of the effects can be attributed to 20% of the causes. so if you are looking for an "80% solution", this then means you are only solving 20% of the problem space.the remaining 80% unsolved stuff might be just "edge cases" that only matter 20% of the time, but those cases can be the most insidious

i'm not actually sure how something like this could be resolved. clearly there is existing functionality that depends on expanding collections found in the audience addressing properties: specifically, the followers collection, which powers the "followers-only post" feature, which is the primary reason activitypub even got adopted by mastodon in the first place

@anantagd maybe? what i'm trying to get at is the idea that people might say something that doesn't mean what they think it means

basically the functionality of reifying a Link in as2 is to be able to describe how a linked resource should be used... but this is the kind of approach that only really makes sense if you have a generic grab-bag of links. and fedi often overloads the `tag` property as this grab-bag... which makes it a lot harder to use `tag` as intended.

@trwnh this also distinguishes things majorly from forum style inline quoting which is mostly about referring to pieces of a previous message

@djsundog anyone who kicks out the jams must be really jelly

looks like some weird mkinitcpio issue where my mkinitcpio.conf was reset? i fixed it and then found out the built initramfs and kernel weren't being copied to my efi boot partition correctly, so i fixed that. i'm back online, i just lost like the past 19 hours of data which is all told not the worst thing in the world i guess. the only thing i would have done differently knowing what i know now is i would have made a backup before trying to fix stuff, or i would have never restored the 19h ago.

@disarray rip

for my part, i think the terms can be made more clear or explicit, for example calling them `hasActivityPubClientAttached` and `inboxManagedByActivityPubServer`, but perhaps this is going too far.also inbox is technically from LDP/LDN and not activitypub, so there probably should be *some* (re)consideration of the server property

@django@social.coop if you have no user context, then it makes sense... but in the two use cases I mentioned, you do. Resolving via search bar, user initiated. Retrieving inReplyTo, user can be assumed from leaf node to or cc (although whether that's a wise assumption is up for debate)

you get to inbox zero and then you blink and find that months have passed and you're suddenly at 600 again

@tedu the problem with deferring to a "replies" collection is that declaring a context is completely orthogonal to declaring a replymy thinking is that IF:- the context is present- the context is dereferenceable- the context is a Collection that has attributedToTHEN:- the context collection is managed by that attributedTo actor, via Add/Remove- you can participate by sending your Create to that actor, with the object having the same context