With Meta starting to actually implement ActivityPub, I think it would be a good idea to remind everyone of what they are most likely going to do.

  • RT Redréovič@feddit.ch
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    7 months ago

    Did you bother to read the article or did you only decide to write this argument w/o any substantial basis?

    • MudMan@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      Oh, I read it when it came out back in June. Many times, as it kept being shared as an explanation of the first Threads backlash.

      It’s full of incorrect assessments and false equivalences.

      Threads doesn’t really have the volume (yet) to subsume ActivityPub. The process it describes for standards drifting towards the corporate actor doesn’t apply to ActivityPub, which is engineered from the ground up to support multiple apps with differnent functionality (hence me writing this in Kbin and others reading it in Lemmy and being able to link it and follow it from Mastodon), the article only acknowledges that XMPP survived and kept on going at the very end as a throwaway and doesn’t justify how it “never recovered” and, like I said, it doesn’t acknowledge the real reasons Talk and every Google successor to Talk struggled and collapsed.

      So yes, I read it. Past the headline and everything. I just didn’t take it at face value. This piece keeps getting shared because XMPP wasn’t ever that big to begin with, so this sounds erudite and informed while the similar arguments being made at the time about SMTP and RSS were more obviously identifiable as being wrong for the same reasons.