"Every Activity Pub server duplicates content. Without it there'd be no seeing posts from anybody on servers other than their home server. It's literally the thing that makes the protocol work. If being on a protocol that specifically is designed to duplicate content isn't permission enough to duplicate content then the Fediverse goes poof. Zilch. Zero. Nada."
So a thing happened and I'm kinda flabbergasted. There appears to be a campaign to shut down the Mostr (Nostr <> ActivityPub bridge). Dunno how big it is, but apparently at least one DMCA complaint has been filed.
Yes and no. From a legal or technical standpoint, all this is true. It is legally allowed, technically necessary. But this doesn't mean it's ethical and that it doesn't violate consent.
I can walk up to two people speaking in "public" to eavesdrop on their conversation. But just because I can, doesn't mean it's right. I can scrape endless pfp images from WhatsApp through their contacts API. But doesn't mean it's right.
So no, just because it's possible it doesn't mean "permission enough". It' just means that it's necessary and people have accepted the risk. Explicit permission is something different entirely. This is about consent, a human property, not about technological or legal constructs.
Bridges are a bit different than scraping content or listening into a conversation. A bridge that bridges Activity Pub to AT/Nostr acts like any other ActivityPub instance, requesting a copy of the bridged user's profile in the same way another ActivityPub native server would. Same with Friendica (that I'm using right now to reply), it requested a copy of your post over Activity Pub, despite being native to DFRN (although, unlike Bridgy Fed/Mostr, Freindica bridges internally via plugin instead of using a dedicated standalone bridge). I'd argue that using a protocol designed for federation, on a server that defaults to federating with any instance not proactively blocked, is rather explicit permission to federate.
However, since it's just federating normally, it's easy to stop. If you block the bridges (at the user level or instance wide) they won't federate, just like any other Activity Pub instance. While I think bridges are important for the ecosystem, the beauty of something that's not centralized is that you can choose exactly what you do and don't want to interact with.
Absolutely, there's this difference. But I'd argue it can only be consensual if whatever happens is somewhat "expected". And depending on the service in question, this isn't always the case. Some people go to the Fedi because they don't want to have their stuff on AT...
@ljrk > I can walk up to two people speaking in "public" to eavesdrop on their conversation
That's not a valid metaphor for Public posts on a federated network. It's more like 2 people speaking on a stage using microphones, connected to a global livestream.
If you don't want strangers to listen to your conversation, that's easy! Just get off the stage. If you want to have a private conversation in a public space that people won't eavesdrop on, that's what Direct posts are for.
@ljrk > it can only be consensual if whatever happens is somewhat "expected"
That's like saying that striking up a conversation with someone at a speed dating event isn't consensual, if that person didn't expect to be spoken to at the event. If people choose to go into a situation, not expecting things that can be reasonably expected, that's on them. Not on everyone else for not being mindreaders.
But none of that will help if people refuse to learn about the options available and how to use them. Or insist that everyone else magically know what they intended, even if their app usage choices suggest the opposite.
Coda: If I stand in the street wearing a "free hugs" sign, it's reasonable for people to expect a free hug. Say someone hugs me, and I claim it was non-consensual because I only expected my friends to take up the offer made on the "free hugs" sign. Is that reasonable on my part?
When you post something as "Public" (instead of "Followers only", or "Private mention", to use the current Mastodon app terms), that's like the "free hugs" sign. People can reasonably expect to take that literally.
> unlike Bridgy Fed/Mostr, Freindica bridges internally via plugin instead of using a dedicated standalone bridge
At the risk of splitting hairs, I think you're stretching the definition of "bridge" beyond breaking point there.
A bridge connects any instance to any instance (of whatever it is they bridge). An AP plugin adds native federation to a single instance, allowing it to connect directly with any remote service federating over AP. Two quite different things.
@eyeinthesky > they could also just dereference the remote URIs when remote content is accessed
They could. But arguably they're still duplicating content. They're just doing it every time someone wants to get the same post or profile through the bridge. So from a user POV nothing is different, it just increases resource consumption for the bridge *and* the origin server.
Big Tech tells us it can't exist without forever chemical (PFAS). A pity these chemicals are killing us.
"It is estimated that 836 kg/yr of volatile PFAS are emitted from US landfills in uncollected gas with a 95% confidence interval (2.5% to 97.5% of the distribution) of 15–5,590 kg/yr. This estimate is comparable to ∼600 kg of PFAS released annually into landfill leachate."
Uno studio dell'Università della Finlandia Orientale rivela che gli americani imprecano di più sui social, mentre gli australiani sono più creativi con le parolacce.
Vesta da zentilomo — Dizionario "Vesta da zentilomo" from the Dizionario del Dialetto Veneziano by Giuseppe Boerio. #Dress #VenetianNobility #Venezia #Venice
Awful things have been happening around this country and world lately, and so many this weekend alone. Trying to remember there are beautiful things too, like this photo Bob Anderson sent of an amazing Montana sunset with snow, ice and the Crazy Mountains.
From Wikipedia "...the community's present name stems from a time when it had a sanatorium to work with tuberculosis patients." Ah yes, that'll make people want to visit.
I was looking for grammar/spell-check language servers to use in Neovim and came across Harper (writewithharper.com/)
Turns out it also has extensions for Firefox/Chrome. I don't use Grammarly, but for people who do, could be a nicer, more private alternative — it's local-only and open-source.
[quote]Rural departments have long relied on cheap software solutions to keep their operations running. But fire chiefs report sharp price increases as investors have entered the market.[/quote]
Rural departments have long relied on cheap software solutions to keep their operations running. But fire chiefs report sharp price increases as investors have entered the market.
A Belarusian variation: Protests after the election. A bus stops, riot police storm out of it, and start beating the first guy they see. 'Stop!' he cries. 'I voted for Lukashenko!' Cops: 'Bullshit! No one voted for Lukashenko!'
Concertbezoekers en een agent achter de dranghekken bij een concert van de Lionel Hampton Big Band in de Houtrusthallen in Den Haag, Ed van der Elsken, 1956
ByteDance’s large language model Doubao announced on December 1 the launch of a mobile assistant and a partnership with ZTE to introduce the “Doubao AI
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.
I completely agree. It's now backfiring that conservative circles never considered Europe as a whole, but only as an economic union. #europe #eu RE: bsky.app/profile/did:plc:ghkzf…
Trump plant offenbar die Rückkehr zu russischer Energie in Europa – genau gegen das, was die EU soeben beschlossen hat. Ein Blick in den "Friedensplans".
Douglas, Georgia. South Georgia tobacco sharecroppers. Fords are beginning to appear among the tobacco sharecroppers. They can bring the crop to the auction at the warehouse, take flour and groceries back to the farm and even carry the boys to Florida for a season's work in the fruit
![This black and white photograph depicts two individuals interacting with a vintage automobile. The scene appears to be from an earlier era, indicated by the style of clothing worn by the subjects and the design features of the vehicle.
One person is seated on the side of the car while working intently on what seems to be a large tire or wheel that has been removed from its original position. This individual wears a wide-brimmed hat, dark jacket, trousers, and boots, suggesting they may be engaged in manual labor. Their posture indicates focus on their task.
The second person is standing behind the car's driver-side window, partially obscured by it. They appear to be observing or engaging with someone outside of the vehicle, as suggested by a hand gesture that resembles holding something close to their mouth. This individual wears lighter-colored clothing and sunglasses, which are indicative of bright daylight conditions.
Various items surround them: bags filled with goods such as flour and groceries—likely staples for sharecroppers—are seen hanging from the car's side mirror or door handle, suggesting they may be in transit between laboring on a farm and selling produce at an auction. A pair of shoes lies discarded near the tire, implying that work has been completed momentarily.
The setting seems to be rural with no significant structures visible beyond what appears [...]](https://poliverso.org/photo/preview/640/68248956 "This black and white photograph depicts two individuals interacting with a vintage automobile. The scene appears to be from an earlier era, indicated by the style of clothing worn by the subjects and the design features of the vehicle.
One person is seated on the side of the car while working intently on what seems to be a large tire or wheel that has been removed from its original position. This individual wears a wide-brimmed hat, dark jacket, trousers, and boots, suggesting they may be engaged in manual labor. Their posture indicates focus on their task.
The second person is standing behind the car's driver-side window, partially obscured by it. They appear to be observing or engaging with someone outside of the vehicle, as suggested by a hand gesture that resembles holding something close to their mouth. This individual wears lighter-colored clothing and sunglasses, which are indicative of bright daylight conditions.
Various items surround them: bags filled with goods such as flour and groceries—likely staples for sharecroppers—are seen hanging from the car's side mirror or door handle, suggesting they may be in transit between laboring on a farm and selling produce at an auction. A pair of shoes lies discarded near the tire, implying that work has been completed momentarily.
The setting seems to be rural with no significant structures visible beyond what appears [...]")
lj·rk
in reply to Strypey • • •Yes and no. From a legal or technical standpoint, all this is true. It is legally allowed, technically necessary. But this doesn't mean it's ethical and that it doesn't violate consent.
I can walk up to two people speaking in "public" to eavesdrop on their conversation. But just because I can, doesn't mean it's right. I can scrape endless pfp images from WhatsApp through their contacts API. But doesn't mean it's right.
So no, just because it's possible it doesn't mean "permission enough". It' just means that it's necessary and people have accepted the risk. Explicit permission is something different entirely. This is about consent, a human property, not about technological or legal constructs.
Nate
in reply to lj·rk • • •Bridges are a bit different than scraping content or listening into a conversation. A bridge that bridges Activity Pub to AT/Nostr acts like any other ActivityPub instance, requesting a copy of the bridged user's profile in the same way another ActivityPub native server would. Same with Friendica (that I'm using right now to reply), it requested a copy of your post over Activity Pub, despite being native to DFRN (although, unlike Bridgy Fed/Mostr, Freindica bridges internally via plugin instead of using a dedicated standalone bridge). I'd argue that using a protocol designed for federation, on a server that defaults to federating with any instance not proactively blocked, is rather explicit permission to federate.
However, since it's just federating normally, it's easy to stop. If you block the bridges (at the user level or instance wide) they won't federate, just like any other Activity Pub instance. While I think bridges are important for the ecosystem, the beauty of something that's not centralized is that you can choose exactly what you do and don't want to interact with.
lj·rk
in reply to Nate • • •Strypey
in reply to lj·rk • • •(1/2)
@ljrk
> I can walk up to two people speaking in "public" to eavesdrop on their conversation
That's not a valid metaphor for Public posts on a federated network. It's more like 2 people speaking on a stage using microphones, connected to a global livestream.
If you don't want strangers to listen to your conversation, that's easy! Just get off the stage. If you want to have a private conversation in a public space that people won't eavesdrop on, that's what Direct posts are for.
@nate
Strypey
in reply to Strypey • • •(2/?)
@ljrk
> it can only be consensual if whatever happens is somewhat "expected"
That's like saying that striking up a conversation with someone at a speed dating event isn't consensual, if that person didn't expect to be spoken to at the event. If people choose to go into a situation, not expecting things that can be reasonably expected, that's on them. Not on everyone else for not being mindreaders.
Strypey
in reply to Strypey • • •(3/3)
I think there is UX work that can be done to make it clearer what level of visibility a post has, and to give people more granular control;
codeberg.org/fediverse/fediver…
But none of that will help if people refuse to learn about the options available and how to use them. Or insist that everyone else magically know what they intended, even if their app usage choices suggest the opposite.
Mapping all possible posting scopes
Codeberg.orgStrypey
in reply to Strypey • • •Coda: If I stand in the street wearing a "free hugs" sign, it's reasonable for people to expect a free hug. Say someone hugs me, and I claim it was non-consensual because I only expected my friends to take up the offer made on the "free hugs" sign. Is that reasonable on my part?
When you post something as "Public" (instead of "Followers only", or "Private mention", to use the current Mastodon app terms), that's like the "free hugs" sign. People can reasonably expect to take that literally.
Strypey
in reply to Strypey • • •Me:
> If you want to have a private conversation in a public space that people won't eavesdrop on, that's what Direct posts are for.
FYI The Mastodon web app currently calls them "Private mentions". Some apps now call them "Only people mentioned" (eg Moshidon).
#FediTips
@ljrk
Strypey
in reply to Nate • • •> unlike Bridgy Fed/Mostr, Freindica bridges internally via plugin instead of using a dedicated standalone bridge
At the risk of splitting hairs, I think you're stretching the definition of "bridge" beyond breaking point there.
A bridge connects any instance to any instance (of whatever it is they bridge). An AP plugin adds native federation to a single instance, allowing it to connect directly with any remote service federating over AP. Two quite different things.
@ljrk
Strypey
Unknown parent • • •> Every Activity Pub server duplicates content
@eyeinthesky
> they could also just dereference the remote URIs when remote content is accessed
They could. But arguably they're still duplicating content. They're just doing it every time someone wants to get the same post or profile through the bridge. So from a user POV nothing is different, it just increases resource consumption for the bridge *and* the origin server.