<p><span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://saltylike.us/@tuckerm" class="u-url mention">@<span>tuckerm</span></a></span> <span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://mas.to/@TechConnectify" class="u-url mention">@<span>TechConnectify</span></a></span> I think it’s reasonable to aim higher than “better than twitter.”</p><p>I’m glad that some people find fulfillment and enjoyment here and wish them well. I’m fine with people deciding Bluesky isn’t for them, and not threatened by it.</p>

<p><span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://mastodon.social/@Popehat" class="u-url mention">@<span>Popehat</span></a></span> <span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://mstdn.social/@MiriShuli" class="u-url mention">@<span>MiriShuli</span></a></span> <span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://mstdn.social/@Pope" class="u-url mention">@<span>Pope</span></a></span> Sad the myths that so many people here believe about Bluesky (starting with the notion that it&#39;s run Jack Dorsey). :(</p><p>(BTW, I&#39;d appreciate it if you&#39;d unblock me on Bluesky - I&#39;m pretty sure you did so due to one of Kairi&#39;s blocklists, except I was added due to a misunderstanding (<a href="https://github.com/bluesky-social/proposals/issues/36" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no"><span class="invisible">https://</span><span class="ellipsis">github.com/bluesky-social/prop</span><span class="invisible">osals/issues/36</span></a> - search for &quot;How thousands of people&quot;) and have since been removed)</p>

<p><span class="h-card"><a href="https://mas.to/@TechConnectify" class="u-url mention">@<span>TechConnectify</span></a></span> Whoa, I hadn&#39;t heard of that. That&#39;s good to know about. Yesterday I saw your post, and <span class="h-card"><a href="https://mastodon.social/@Popehat" class="u-url mention">@<span>Popehat</span></a></span> said something similar. I absolutely believe what you&#39;re saying. But that same day I also saw posts from other people about how much better their time on Mastodon has been compared to Twitter. (I don&#39;t think that was in reference to you two, they were just saying it.)</p><p>Those other people had between 500 and 3,000 followers. Seems like a noise-filter is a must-have for large accounts.</p>

<p><span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://lgbt.io/@mordremoth" class="u-url mention">@<span>mordremoth</span></a></span> doesn&#39;t even need to be hosted on servers, it can be peer to peer - how many of us have half terabyte here and 100 gig there available - I can easily seed federated search content (client-independent of course so you do yours and I do mine) and thanks to the tagging I subscribe to cooking, art and linux and you to cats, music and bsd, you host a web frontend for searching, I wrote a browser plugin for it..</p>

Oi, spoilers! (yes, they do)

For server-independent IDs, would that be stored under another property name other than `id`, or something fully replacing the `id` or being appended to it and parsed? If a server is receiving an activity, then it should inherently have some implied discoverability about where the activity is stored, if it wasn't sent through a relay. I don't know if there's some supplemental identifier that could be associated to an instance that's decoupled from DNS. Maybe a public key-based identifier for a 'activity/actor storage server'? For encrypting private data: perhaps _start_ on a simple PGP-ish model, where payload is encrypted directly for the actor's keypair. People may whine that it doesn't fill every checkbox of their "demands" for privacy, but it would be trivial to implement, and some later "true E2EE with full forward secrecy" solution can come later as an optional upgrade. Perhaps there'd need to be a new object type (or something borrowed from vocabulary of other JSON-LD-based crypto specs) such as 'EncryptedActivity', maybe with an optional type-hint of what the payload activity/object type is (if it's not anything somehow sensitive). Ultimately, I do strongly believe FEP-c390 and FEP-ae97 is the inherent future for ActivityPub, or some light variation of it, and I really hope to see the current hack of HTTP Signatures (and _especially_ the current one-key-only per actor representation, for a key that's just an entirely server-held always-unencrypted private key in a database) to be gradually phased out soon (or at least a shift towards a 'server key' for HTTP Signature-based delivery, of something that can be locked down, versus the lie of a private key for each actor, that the actor doesn't even control, in the current use of HTTP Signatures).

<p><span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://chaos.social/@traumaphoenix" class="u-url mention">@<span>traumaphoenix</span></a></span> no, but i think she is holding back on that (seriously)</p>

:feelsbadman: