jamie

joined 2 years ago
sorted by: new top controversial old
@chronohart in c/[email protected]
[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

@[email protected]
@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected]

I'm not a GDPR expert, but because the bridge isn't stateful (ie just forwards posts) I don't think you are going to apply any of the data directives. Worst case, you might have to do something for instances hosted in Europe. But whatever you do applies much more strongly to actual instance servers. Those are hosting data created by and about users.

@chronohart in c/[email protected]
[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (3 children)

@[email protected]
@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected]

That takes a lot of time, and as someone in IT, most people take the defaults and are SHOCKED to learn some features exist. ๐Ÿ˜

Having this behave like the rest of the fediverse accelerates the awareness and usefulness of the bridge.

You can more rapidly achieve the goal of allowing people to connect and converse. That is after all why the fediverse exists. The rest of this is semantics.

@oliphant in c/[email protected]
[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

@[email protected]
@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected]

Based on Ryan's response and some of the other descriptions, it sounds like the bridge software knows how to handle AP block requests. So, they should be the same.

@oliphant in c/[email protected]
[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

@[email protected]
@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected]

From reading some of the other posts and his answer to my earlier post, it seems he is accepting AP blocks in the software. So, both the tag and a block (domain or user) should work the same way.

0
@chronohart (boothcomputing.social)
 

@chronohart
@luca @PCOWandre @activitypubblueskybridge @fedidevs @fediversenews

No, but they could also create an AP account and harass the person. This bridge doesn't make that any more or less likely. You still have the same tools to block a user even if they are over the bridge.

I think there are a lot of positives to connect people who landed on different platforms. The possibility of harassment is really a more global Internet problem not AP/BS/Threads specific.

0
@chronohart (boothcomputing.social)
 

@chronohart
@luca @PCOWandre @activitypubblueskybridge @fedidevs @fediversenews

What about if the person reaching out is from BS? If my friend on the AP side hasn't found this bridge and opted in, they won't show up when I try to add them. A lot has to go right for these people to reconnect if they have to opt in. In my case, all I have are remembered Twitter handles that I'll try to search across the bridge fir that handle. If I get results, I'll try to follow.

0
@oliphant (boothcomputing.social)
 

@oliphant
@HistoPol @snarfed
@snarfed.org @luca @PCOWandre @fedidevs @fediversenews @chronohart @activitypubblueskybridge

I'm wondering if that means there may be a functional difference between blocking the bridge vs adding the #nobridge tag?

@chronohart in c/[email protected]
[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (11 children)

@[email protected]
@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected]

This is a really good question and I don't know the answer. This is the kinda of thing I think we should be asking about the bridge.

@[email protected] do you know the answer to this?

0
@chronohart (boothcomputing.social)
 

@chronohart
@luca @PCOWandre @activitypubblueskybridge @fedidevs @fediversenews

Let's be honest most people have no idea this bridge is going to exist. So, they can't opt-in. If nobody opts-in, you won't be able to search for them by their ActivityPub handles. The bridge isn't useful. People on both sides who would like to reconnect with their friends won't be able to. However, if you know you hate BS, you can add the bridge to your personal block list and it isn't an issue for you.

@tness16 in c/[email protected]
[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

@[email protected]
@[email protected] @[email protected]

My guess is it won't have any way to know. But I don't know if BS has a bot tag like Mastodon.

I would also say not all bots are bad. You can have bots that report traffic or weather. Governments have bots for distributing information.

I feel like a lot of the responses to this have been reactions to the worst possible scenario. That rarely happens. Reality is somewhere in the middle.

@tness16 in c/[email protected]
[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (3 children)

@[email protected]
@[email protected] @[email protected]

I think it's ok to question the management and assess the risks (as long as you don't do it in a vacuum...AI is/will be an issue on ActivityPub as well). But, I also would remind you that there are real people who just want to get along and interact with their friends who happen to be on ActivityPub. This bridge allows that.

0
@tness16 (boothcomputing.social)
 

@tness16
@snarfed.org @activitypubblueskybridge

Assuming the big door in this context is to join an ActivityPub server, I know several people who came here when Twitter blew up and weren't warmly welcomed. Lots of people telling them they were doing it wrong, etc. So, they left and went to places like Threads or BlueSky. This is giving them a chance to be on their instance of choice (BlueSky) and still follow their friends who did stay on ActivityPub.