FEP drafting: Am I using “side effects” here the same way as other ActivityPub developers?
Technical Discussion
5
Posts
3
Posters
0
Views
-
FEP drafting: Am I using “side effects” here the same way as other ActivityPub developers? I've seen the term used a bunch in casual conversation, but my personal understanding of it is kinda fuzzy.
-
FEP drafting: Am I using “side effects” here the same way as other ActivityPub developers? I've seen the term used a bunch in casual conversation, but my personal understanding of it is kinda fuzzy.
@julian I use side-effect a lot when talking about ActivityPub activities and I mean it close in context to its functional programming meaning, where an action can have side-effects which are not immediately observable from its input or output.
Ie, when a Create activity determines a server to persist an object to disk that's a side-effect of the Create. When an Undo activity removes its object activity from disk, that's another side-effect. They are not immediately observable from the results of the Activity upon its server or its client.
Does that make sense?
-
@julian I use side-effect a lot when talking about ActivityPub activities and I mean it close in context to its functional programming meaning, where an action can have side-effects which are not immediately observable from its input or output.
Ie, when a Create activity determines a server to persist an object to disk that's a side-effect of the Create. When an Undo activity removes its object activity from disk, that's another side-effect. They are not immediately observable from the results of the Activity upon its server or its client.
Does that make sense?
@mariusor I think I get it, yeah. Would that still fit with my draft definition? It feels weird to call it a side effect when a `Like` towards an object gets added to its `likes` collection, since that's arguably part of the intended effect. But that's what I'm picking up from the standard as well: https://www.w3.org/TR/activitypub/#likes
-
@mariusor I think I get it, yeah. Would that still fit with my draft definition? It feels weird to call it a side effect when a `Like` towards an object gets added to its `likes` collection, since that's arguably part of the intended effect. But that's what I'm picking up from the standard as well: https://www.w3.org/TR/activitypub/#likes
@julian I think so, to me that sounds entirely correct, or at least I would understand what you mean. :)
-
FEP drafting: Am I using “side effects” here the same way as other ActivityPub developers? I've seen the term used a bunch in casual conversation, but my personal understanding of it is kinda fuzzy.
@julian@fietkau.social yes you are correct as far as my limited understanding goes.
My personal definition of side effect limited to "unintended consequences", which differs greatly from the ActivityStreams definition, so for my own sanity I avoid the term in my own documents 🙂
Gli ultimi otto messaggi ricevuti dalla Federazione
-
-
@evan I think this is one of the problems with Mastodon being the go to for people in the fediverse, and is also why I've been looking things up and trying to work out how the good ol concept Google+ had could work well in the fediverse, and also supporting all the features of ActivityPub instead of using its own thing, and I even had the idea that if I can get a service like that off the ground, I'd be happy for a non-biased nonprofit organisation to take over. A name for it I thought of is Fedi+ and if eventually that was to be ran by something like the Social Web Foundation or something, that could really help the fediverse at large.
-
@evan Ah, I was only tagging you as an FYI, but thank you, appreciate it!
-
@stefan I asked the question I wanted to ask. I'll boost your poll, though.
-
Mastodon doesn't do either of these things, by the way. It doesn't let you reply to Alice's followers, and it doesn't use the `replies` collection for showing and hiding replies. It's too bad; these are really valuable features of ActivityPub.
-
Other servers can and should use Alice's `replies` collection to see which replies she has consented to. They can and should obscure or hide altogether replies that aren't in that collection.
-
Oh, one thing that is worth noting: a lot of people insisted on Bob's absolute prerogative to reply with any kind of visibility he wants: public, his followers, whatever.
This is technically true, but Alice also has some agency here. Her server maintains a collection of `replies` that can be used to read all the replies. There's also another collection for the full thread.
Her server can omit replies that violate her expectations. This limits Bob's reach somewhat.
