Browser.Pub and Anubis
Technical Discussion
15
Posts
4
Posters
47
Views
-
Hey @js@podcastindex.social, I enabled Anubis for my site, but now requests from Browser.pub don't work :cry:
Is there something I can write a rule against, perhaps a header or user agent string that is unique to browser.pub?
-
@julian hmm, I believe it tries to make each AP call from the browser first, then falls back to a cloudflare worker if that fails.
I just checked the cf worker and found this gem in it, so that might work for you too
-
@julian hmm, I believe it tries to make each AP call from the browser first, then falls back to a cloudflare worker if that fails.
I just checked the cf worker and found this gem in it, so that might work for you too
@js@podcastindex.social thanks! 🤘
-
@js@podcastindex.social Any chance you can update that worker to add in something related to BrowserPub (like the main browserpub url)?
Deno/1.45.2is vague (and also would change, over time :smile: )It's the
commentpart of the User-Agent header -
@julian not sure why you'd want to put your public AP stuff behind something like Anubis - a thing in general that I think is pretty anti-web to begin with
you're losing out on all sorts of cool integrations that you don't even know about
-
@julian hmm, I believe it tries to make each AP call from the browser first, then falls back to a cloudflare worker if that fails.
I just checked the cf worker and found this gem in it, so that might work for you too
-
@julian not sure why you'd want to put your public AP stuff behind something like Anubis - a thing in general that I think is pretty anti-web to begin with
you're losing out on all sorts of cool integrations that you don't even know about
@js@podcastindex.social AI crawlers are hammering the site fairy regularly, and my options are to allocate additional resources or put something in front, otherwise my site is inaccessible for hours/days at a time.
Cool integrations are great until they hamper usability of the site 🫤 if the crawlers behaved a bit more like search engine crawlers I'd have no problem.
-
-
@js@podcastindex.social Although... now that you mention it, Anubis does have the ability to filter by header values, so I will update the bot policy file to allow the standard ActivityPub accept headers.
-
-
-
@js@podcastindex.social done and tested as working. Looking for the AP Accept headers now. Thanks for the suggestion :smile:
-
@julian perfect!
-
@js
Well, all of our fediverse software is in deno. For example, as user agent for Menchys we use menschys.org just like Julian said already. I would not use an external software name as user agent. Would be cool if you could update thank you. -
Feed RSS
Gli ultimi otto messaggi ricevuti dalla Federazione
-
@douwe@waag.social The protocol itself hasn't changed radically in the last 18 months. If you want to understand ActivityPub and ATProto's similarities and differences, you can't find a better analysis than Christine's. She is one of my co-authors on ActivityPub, and she really dug deep into both protocols.
-
@evan that is indeed a while ago. As far as I understood ATproto has made significant improvements for federation since...
-
@douwe This article by @danabra.mov is pretty helpful: https://overreacted.io/open-social/
-
@douwe@waag.social Christine Lemmer-Webber did a great analysis a while ago:
https://dustycloud.org/blog/how-decentralized-is-bluesky/
It's a great place to start.
-
Trying to better understand ATproto and Activitypub similarities and differences.
People here with recent reading/listening/watch tips?
#fediverse #eurosky #bluesky #activitypub #ATProto #Mastodon
-
definitely not a fan of this. tbh, there should just not be a global feed that new accounts see, because they see a lot of stuff they don't understand or know the community norms for, and that leads to bad engagement.
-
There is the Web Share API, and the future Web Share Targets API, but I think we could also align Web Share with FedCM and be able to say "I want to share to this type of application"
-
@reiver i think the disjunction between Object and Link was actually unnecessary. https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams/issues/666
i also think there's too much emphasis on types when there really shouldn't be -- it's the *properties* that you end up using almost all of the time. pretty much the only types that actually matter are the Activity types (because you can't infer those).
