Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We need a federation of forges

blog.tangled.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 424 posts

Re: We need a federation of forges

#301

Post by fc417fc802 »

supern0va wrote: post #299
Karrot_Kream wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's largely perceived to be an ideological site. Obviously every community has its own biases and tastes, but I think Bluesky has just captured the imagination as the "left-leaning social platform." When the NYT was talking about a potential link between the WHCD shooter and Bluesky posts, that's what they referred to Bluesky as. Obviously Tangled can live completely separate from Bluesky, it doesn't even need to sh…

>It's largely just become an ideological site. That may be the case, but anyone can use ATProto. Unlike X where reach is suppressed for ideological motivations, or Mastodon with the federation turf wars, anyone can use it, regardless of their politics. If you disagree with the ideology of the majority users and avoid it for that reason, it just perpetuates the problem. Unfortunately, I suspect it is only that way at…

Unlike Mastodon? What's the difference? Anyone can use AP regardless of politics, you just might get banned from other's infra the same as for ATProto.

Re: We need a federation of forges

#302

Post by ascorbic »

liveoneggs wrote: post #263
jonahx wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "some reason" isn't mysterious... it's redundancy and avoiding a single point of failure and ownership.

But the actual git part isn't federated

Git itself is already federated. Every clone is a repo. That's not the bit that needs fixing.

Re: We need a federation of forges

#303

Post by jauntywundrkind »

tolerance wrote: post #293
jauntywundrkind wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's always some Gemini protocol faction that shows up to yell that everything is wrong and we have to keep hand assembling our packets by hand or it'll never work. Atproto's PDS is the root idea that everything extends off of, is the "social filesystem" that you control. There's a protocol objective to be able to spread your data around widely and for folks to be able to cryptographically check that that data cam…

> If you need your static site to be on atproto (yay!), you can just have one of the various PDS hosts (such as Bluesky or eurosky or black sky or npmx) host the PDS for your. Since it is authenticated and user sovereign, you can permissionlessly move to a different host whenever you please, should that go awry. These seems to defeat the purpose of the relative amount of sovereignty that hosting a static site gives y…

Your data is still signed by you, and you still have the keys to move your PDS no matter what happens to your host. Do you have an actual threat model or reason why you are so afraid / unwilling to accept any compromise?

Your lack of a reply at the end, refusing to support basically your entire ask with even a modicum of supporting cause, feels a bit vindicating, that indeed you are a hostile agent & not here to engage or discuss, but to throw bombs.

Re: We need a federation of forges

#304

Post by embedding-shape »

Terr_ wrote: post #300
embedding-shape wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that kind of makes sense to me, you chose that instance because you're OK with that admin making choices for you. Just like how I choose to post comments on HN, and if the admins/moderators tell me to stop something, or that now half my comments are gone for reason X, I can't really cry about it, all I can do is follow what admins do/say or jump ship.

So... basically the bad problem everybody was intending to solve in the first place?

As far as I know, Mastodon didn't really set out to solve that particular problem. But it does seem like ATProto did, as it seems a lot easier to move around in ATProto than Mastodon (and ActivityPub in general).

Re: We need a federation of forges

#305

Post by fc417fc802 »

knotbin wrote: post #211
rafram wrote: post #209

How will this end up going any better than Mastodon has? Near inevitabilities: - All the small instances defederating from the largest due to politics/spam/annoying noobs/whatever, effectively killing the easiest path to entry into the community - Pointless debates about whether it’s OK to federate with instances that host pirated content, disagreeable politics, furry VNs, etc., which everyone has to take a side (the…

ATproto federates in a very different way than Mastodon. There is no concept of "instances" on ATproto. Your account is hosted on a PDS and you sign into the app with your PDS sign-in and records go to your PDS, but everything on the app is from what's called an "AppView" which provides a centralized view of all data in all PDSes so it feels just like you're using a regular centralized app. But there can be multiple…

> There is no concept of "instances" on ATproto.

Regardless of name and precise technical details, there are central service components that can ban you. If a proper ecosystem of those ever springs up then the equivalent of fediblock (ie guilt by association) oriented at individual accounts or PDS is the next logical step. At present (last I checked) there's only (approximately) one primary provider plus blacksky making the situation even worse.

This isn't some wild hypothetical - we also see guilt by association in the matrix ecosystem.

Re: We need a federation of forges

#306

Post by tolerance »

jauntywundrkind wrote: post #303
tolerance wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you need your static site to be on atproto (yay!), you can just have one of the various PDS hosts (such as Bluesky or eurosky or black sky or npmx) host the PDS for your. Since it is authenticated and user sovereign, you can permissionlessly move to a different host whenever you please, should that go awry. These seems to defeat the purpose of the relative amount of sovereignty that hosting a static site gives y…

Your data is still signed by you, and you still have the keys to move your PDS no matter what happens to your host. Do you have an actual threat model or reason why you are so afraid / unwilling to accept any compromise? Your lack of a reply at the end, refusing to support basically your entire ask with even a modicum of supporting cause, feels a bit vindicating, that indeed you are a hostile agent & not here to enga…

> Do you have an actual threat model or reason why you are so afraid / unwilling to accept any compromise?

Have we met?

Re: We need a federation of forges

#307

Post by bigbadfeline »

embedding-shape wrote: post #285
miki123211 wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, because this happens on a per-admin level, not on a per-user level. You go on a cruise for two weeks and there's a disagreement about whether to federate with Meta or not. Your admin takes a side, whatever that side might be. Two weeks later, you come back and lose 10% of followers, and there's nothing you can do about it.

Yeah, that kind of makes sense to me, you chose that instance because you're OK with that admin making choices for you. Just like how I choose to post comments on HN, and if the admins/moderators tell me to stop something, or that now half my comments are gone for reason X, I can't really cry about it, all I can do is follow what admins do/say or jump ship.

> you chose that instance because you're OK with that admin making choices for you

Nobody chooses instances for that, very few know anything about the admin, people just like the content until... in >70% of cases, bait and switch follows

That's why Mastodon is such an incredible mess, it creates the conditions for serious problems, then goes: "you chose what you knew nothing about, nor there's any way to know anything, therefore... you are the problem".

Re: We need a federation of forges

#308

Post by ddosmax556 »

Synthetic7346 wrote: post #149
ddosmax556 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're seriously using agents, you'll know that if they didn't offer that then people would rapidly switch platforms if they didn't. Maybe not all of them yet, but soon it will be all.

Switch platforms to what?

Switch to a git provider that offers agentic augmentation of your workflow. And I don't necessairly mean the way it works right now - it's being refined & adjusted & infrastructure is being built as we speak.

For example, in our company, most commits on main currently have 3-5 authors (we squash): 1-2 humans, 1-3 agents (cursor cloud agent getting started, ppl pulling it into cursor locally to continue, then review using copilot review, modify using copilot agent) then use a vibe coded github app offloading UI test execution to a beefy baremetal machine to adjust baselines.

Copilot review in particular is just so good, better than any agent i know (incl opus 4.7). It just allows you to skip the first few review rounds by humans and fix simple but hard to spot logical bugs, keep docstring & style up to date across the codebase, before you give it to a human - which means everyone can focus on writing more code.

Setting all of this up, at a massive scale, is just not feasible for any of these projects.

Re: We need a federation of forges

#310

Post by [deleted] »

jauntywundrkind wrote: post #274
cxr wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Atproto isn’t “many servers sending messages to each other”. It’s structured more like RSS Except that, crucially, RSS/Atom plays well with static nodes (e.g. personal websites generated with Jekyll/Hugo/whatever—or even written by hand[1]), and Atproto does not. (Nor does Mastodon; previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30862612 >.) It'd be great if the complexities needed to support the "Atmosphere" wer…

There's always some Gemini protocol faction that shows up to yell that everything is wrong and we have to keep hand assembling our packets by hand or it'll never work. Atproto's PDS is the root idea that everything extends off of, is the "social filesystem" that you control. There's a protocol objective to be able to spread your data around widely and for folks to be able to cryptographically check that that data cam…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN