ActivityPub

rimu@piefed.social I've been using web+acct for the acct URI format. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acct_URI_scheme

Jon-Pincus hey check out that topic loading from within this NodeBB cc admin@discussions.thenexus.today

julian:Right now if you copy a NodeBB topic (/topic/12345) and paste it into something like Mastodon, you'll get nothing because it is an ordered collection and it doesn't know how to handle it.It would be really great if you got something useful when you look up a NodeBB topic in Mastodon!

agreed that it's not broadly useful to have discussions that aren't seen by people who want to see them. It's a two-way problem, keeping SocialHub in the loop and keeping everybody else in the loop as well. It's a good example of what I was talkingn about in the other thread: it's useful to get input on the question of whether or not SocialHub discussions are currenlty meaningfully "on the fediverse" from people who don't have SocialHub accounts!I'm not sure you need to be able to fully pull in discussions that are happening elsewhere ... for example a link aggregator that combines links to interesting discussions elsewhere with discussions of its own that others can participate isn't as smoothly integrated but could still be useful. Being able to have threaded, categorized long-form discussions that people who have accounts elsewhere can broadly participate in certainly seems like something that a lot of people want. If that's not possible with current fediverse software then (a) that's disappointing but also (b) now's as good a time as any to work on improving it and this is as good a use case as any. By contrast it seems to me that most of the potential audience doesn't want non-federated threaded, categorized long-form discussions enough with the people currently active on SocialHub to participate on any kind of regular basis on SH.@julian @trwnh

That was the main point of my presentation at #Fedicon2025, that:1. We need a real payment infrastructure here on the Fediverse.2. We need to do it well, to avoid the (numerous) sins of the past.3. I'm doing that right now, PLEASE HELP ME OMG.I can't wait until the videos are up, then I can just link to that presentation a thousand times, because I laid out my entire life's purpose in it.@mro @gregalotl @julian @reiver

@dansup @reiver Ha! It wasn't me; it was the SWF.

@deadsuperhero @frequency thanks!

@SouthFresh @fedicon LOL. Yes

Furbland-Channel-2 Looks like it’s working now after some updates. The request stayed pending until I unfollowed and followed again. Maybe add a way to check and fix this automatically. Also, I wish I had more reputation to post faster!

evan@cosocial.ca that's cool, so hopefully I'll have something to test against besides another NodeBB server

@julian@community.nodebb.org This is definitely something I've seen a lot of over the years. Take curation, for example. WordPress has a discovery portal for blogs and interesting content. So does Ghost. So does Medium. To some extent, so does Blogger. A lot of these platforms get caught up in self-discovery and promotion amongst their own kind, when they'd all clearly benefit from showcasing a wider part of the Web regardless of underlying platform. I really love the idea of Ghost's "Reader View" which highlights articles from publications you're subscribed to. It would be amazing to see this kind of utility and a social feed in all blogging platforms.

julian@community.nodebb.org said in Backfilling Conversations: Two Major Approaches: > A number of implementors follow this approach to backfill, including NodeBB, Discourse, WordPress, Frequency, Mitra, and Streams. Additional implementors like Lemmy and Piefed have expressed interest. Is this implemented currently? One weakness I have noticed in NodeBB's current federation is that posts which are in reply to a topic (e.g. a Lemmy comment) show up as individual threads until (or if) the root post of that topic shows up in the local NodeBB. It's a bit confusing of a UX, I think. Because you think: (Before root post) Why is this a post that seems to be just a random comment? (After root post) Why did that other thread disappear and why am I seeing the same comment again?

@julian Okay, that makes sense.

@julian @mikedev Yes, if you receive an Announce(Create), and Create is not signed, then you need to retrieve this Create from its origin. When that origin server receives your signed GET request, it needs to verify that you belong to the group, but it might not have that information.

Hello from Hubzilla!