otl

joined 8 months ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

When you specify To: [email protected] how does the bridge know if you meant https://aussie.zone/c/localtesting or https://aussie.zone/u/localtesting instead?

Good question

The process of going from that email-like address to an ActivityPub Actor (https URL) is done by WebFinger. So whatever we get back from that lookup is who we send the message to. For example, when we look up [email protected] we get this response (truncated for readability):

{
  "rel": "self",
  "type": "application/activity+json",
  "href": "https://aussie.zone/c/localtesting",
  "properties": {
    "https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#type": "Group"
  }
}

The value for type, application/activity+json tells us that we can send ActivityPub stuff to it.

You can play around with WebFinger in the browser.

Hope that makes sense?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

Hey mate thanks for writing all that down. Gives me a few ideas - in particular how NNTP could fit in to the equation.

LKML can be accessed by a usenet client at nntp.lore.kernel.org. In theory, then, it should be possible to at least read both LKML and ActivityPub stuff hosted at the same NNTP server. To get that working means making sure all the conversion and mapping of concepts are as clean as possible. It's a good test!

Thanks again!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

Don't tempt me :D

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I'd much rather have this put in front of LKML than the terrible interface they have right now.

Interesting. Could you go into this a bit more? Do you mean for example being able to use the Lemmy web UI to read LKML?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

Oh wow awesome. Thanks so much!

It needs a bit more fleshing out, removing a bit of hardcoding too. And of course I want to publishit under an open source licence too. Thanks for the tip - I've written it down in the growing TODO file! :)

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

This is interesting, but have you considered porting to Usenet?

Yes that's on the list! Now that I have a whole bunch of RFC822 files, (in Maildirs) I can also serve them over read-only NNTP. This was the original goal actually - I like the idea of using the simpler protocol NNTP over IMAP to read stuff.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 8 months ago (2 children)

The alternative is something like FediSeer where you can get sites guaranteed by others and block anything not given the all-clear, but that really harms the ability for new sites to appear.

If something like this were to gain lots of traction I'd hope it would be something not too difficult to implement by smaller new sites.

What really sucks is the situation with email now: it's really tricky to get stuff delivered if you're not Google/Microsoft. The barrier to entry is way, way too high :(

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

The alternative is something like FediSeer where you can get sites guaranteed by others and block anything not given the all-clear, but that really harms the ability for new sites to appear.

If something like this were to gain lots of traction I'd hope it would be something not too difficult to implement by smaller new sites.

What really sucks is the situation with email now: it's really tricky to get stuff delivered if you're not Google/Microsoft. The barrier to entry is way, way too high :(

[–] [email protected] 14 points 8 months ago

And ofc the extra spicy sms bridge where an AI gives you an executive summary of your memes for the day

needs more crypto

[–] [email protected] 29 points 8 months ago (2 children)

UNSUBSCRIBE

;)

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago

UNSUBSCRIBE

;)

[–] [email protected] 15 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Thanks for replying from friendica! Confirming message received OK :)

 

What have I done?! My abomination of an idea of bridging my email and ActivityPub progresses. If you see this message, something is working! Comments replies are welcome as it's a good test of this system :)

People keep saying ActivityPub is a lot like email. If it's so similar to email, could I use my email client to interact with the fediverse?

Previously I did this by writing a SMTP interface to the Mastodon HTTP API. That worked. But as we probably know, the fediverse is not Mastodon; it's really ActivityPub. The real deal would be working with ActivityPub directly, not the Mastodon HTTP API.

And that's now (mostly?) working! In shonky diagram form, sending looks like this:

laptop --SMTP--> my_server --ActivityPub--> fediverse

Replies look like this:

fediverse --ActivityPub--> my_server --SMTP--> mailbox <--IMAP-- laptop

my_server translates back and forth between ActivityPub messages and mail messages.

For example given the message:

Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2024 16:37:59 +1100
From: Oliver Lowe <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: test 2

test hello world!

The following ActivityPub message is created:

{
	"@context": "https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams",
	"id":"https://apubtest2.srcbeat.com/outbox/1709703480070628170",
	"type":"Note",
	"name":"test 2",
	"to": ["https://aussie.zone/c/localtesting","https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"],
	"cc": ["https://aussie.zone/c/localtesting"],
	"published":"2024-03-06T16:37:59+11:00",
	"attributedTo":"https://apubtest2.srcbeat.com/actor.json",
	"content":"test hello world!",
	"mediaType":"text/markdown"
}

There's still a lot of bugs (of course) and unimplemented bits (of course). I can't call this a proper fediverse service yet. I'm going to roll with this for a bit and see how it holds up.

view more: next ›