Thinking about the future where Microblogging and link-aggregation sites on the fediverse have grown, how do you see them integrating?

It’s a bit one-directional right now since I don’t think Lemmy has the concept of following people or #topics outside of Lemmy, but mastodon users can follow Lemmy communities and the posts and comments show up fairly nicely.

Do you think the ability to combine those two domains in one interface (even the same timeline) is useful at all?

I’m envisioning a content creator posting a video on peertube and being posted to one of the link-aggregator instances and people commenting on it via Mastodon and all of the comments being able to reference each other no matter where they were posted. I think that’s pretty amazing compared to what we have now where you’re conversation is basically stuck where it was started on the traditional services.

  • eshep@social.trom.tf
    6·
    2 years ago

    @jax It sucks you can’t subscribe to #PeerTube stuff from #Lemmy. Simply having the ability to pull hashtags into your feed would be a nice touch. Or just letting users subscribe to things via #RSS could help.

    I comment on PeerTube stuff from #Friendica but don’t see any (dis)like counts and only some of the comments. If the video post is looked at from #Mastodon, it seems to display all the comments, #Pleroma shows the same limited few as Friendica, and #Misskey shows most of the comments seen on PeerTube. But none show any (dis)like counts from PeerTube, the ones they do show are limited to how likes are distributed for that software.

    As far as Lemmy votes are concerned, they display and function quite nicely within Friendica. I shows me the same number of both up/down votes as likes/dislikes as I see if I look at them on Lemmy.

    Maybe one day somebody will unlock the secret for full interoperability amongst all ActivityPub services. Till then, we’re just stuck trying to find ways around the limitations we have.

    • Kichae@kbin.social
      5·
      2 years ago

      Full and mutual interoperability just means everything develops toward the same feature sets, which probably isn’t what we want.

      Core features should always be interopable, of course, but we don’t want to box developers in.

    • jaxOPA
      2·
      2 years ago

      Awe :/ yeah that’s not nearly as integrated as I first thought it would be :(

      I wonder if it would be possible to build like, a bridge that converts different types of actions to other actions that make sense on another platform?

      • eshep@social.trom.tf
        2·
        2 years ago

        @jax I think what all #ActivityPub connected things need is a standard for intercommunication. Things that don’t necessarily get passed, but can be pulled, cached, and updated. Basic things such as timestamp in UTC, service used, post/reply hierarchy, full comment threads, title vs body, and surely a few more. Each service could add their own flairy bits on top of that to give their software its unique flavor. The likes/dislikes or up/down votes replicating to everyone is something I’ve heard is a deliberate(?) ““feature””. Personally, I don’t think those need to be any more than an acknowledgement between two people, not a public advertisement of comment popularity.

        • jaxOPA
          2·
          2 years ago

          Yeah, I thought the ActivityPub standard was a lot more standard than it actually seems to be. That’s probably both a good and bad thing. It would be nice to see some more cohesion though.