zdunn
I don't understand the relevance of this point. RSS is infrastructure so why would end users need to know about it? They don't know about IP addresses when they type a domain name into a browser, but you wouldn't argue that it isn't mainstream tech.
> Some of the most popular podcast platforms like YouTube and Spotify are completely detached from RSS.
This is a quibble and beside the point, but neither of these platforms have podcasts. I can't subscribe to their audio tracks in a podcast player.
But again, I don't see the releavnce. Some platforms not using RSS doesn't detract from the usage that RSS does have.
> Decentralizing that type of interactivity has only recently been achieved by ActivityPub.
This was not a recent occurence. ActivityPub is descended from a long line of work (Ostatus, pump.io, etc) some of which used Atom. Dave Winer (one of the developers of RSS) is experimenting with building a full social network on top of RSS. Podcasting 2.0 (https://podcasting2.org) is working on adding chat/commenting to podcasts. Your original assertion was that RSS can't be used to build something like TikTok, but there have been multiple projects built with either RSS or a close enough analog that show it can be done
Secondly, that just leads back to my first point. The ads (even targeted ads) are already on the final content.
I just can't view this as a failing of RSS. It wasn't intended to help publishers advertise, it was intended to help end users track the sites they wanted to track. I understand these are some of the reasons Google and other publishers disincentivized the usage of RSS but RSS works great for its intended purpose. I want more technology like RSS, not tech that helps publishers exploit us
There's no reason similar UIs can't exist for text based content. Google Reader, and then G+, had a path to becoming "mainstream outside of techie circles"
There's nothing special about TikTok's user experience. It uses an algorithm that isn't interested in providing a chronological feed, but I don't see why RSS couldn't be used to build something similar. Again, podcasts use it and it works well for that. The discovery aspect happens outside of the scope of RSS, but once you find things you like, RSS works well for tracking them.
The tiktok (or any corporate social media, really) comparison is also a bit odd because they don't need RSS, even if they wanted to provide a chronological feed. The platform hosts the content so it knows when there's new stuff and how to access it to provide to followers. RSS is useful in a decentralized environment where the content could be hosted anywhere and you want to aggregate it
Also, can't the ads be a part of the feed just as nicely as the articles? What's stopping publishers from inserting ads as items in the feed?
I'm a native English speaker (US). Sometimes when I say "ever"/"never", the 'v' sound drops out. So I end up saying "e'er"/"ne'er" but it sounds like "air"/"nair".
> Further down the list, I've just spotted "taught, taut, tot" and "tot" doesn't belong there.
I pronounce all of these the same
For everything in this list, its incredibly common for these groupings to have the same pronunciation where I live.
"pont bridge" sounds like the exact phenomenon though. Does it have a more specific meaning that "bridge"?
My argument is that it's not a mistranslation. In Spanish, "horno" means any kind of oven. In English, it means specifically an earth oven because when English speakers started using the word, they always used it to mean that kind of oven.
A sibling comment mentioned chai tea. It's the same phenomenon. Chai means any tea in its original language, but in English it means a specific variety and preparation of tea.
English is a bastardized language and has a lot of words borrowed from other languages. But once they're borrowed, they're English words and have their own meaning separate from their original loanword.
EDIT: Probably the reason this happens is that most English speakers wouldn't be familiar with the foreign word, so the speaker uses it as a modifier to the standard English word. The listener doesn't need to know anything specific about the foreign word in that case and can just assume it's a type of the common item.
If ppl drive more than use transit, they won't support improvements to transit. This is the first step to improving transit. Make driving less attractive, more ppl use transit, complain about its shortcomings, and then fixes get implemented.
I also don't see why we shouldn't make driving less attractive. As the grandparent comment said, drivers should be the ones paying for the problems caused by drivers, not residents.
It's discussed at the very end of section 8 and all of section 9 that interactive functionality would use web components.
But what the parent is saying is you don't have to be compatible with 100% of websites. If you build a browser with good HTML/CSS/Javascript handling, you'll be compatible with the large majority of the web. Yes, there are other specs that are in use by a tiny portion of the web. But your browser can still exist if it doesn't support them. Users of that website will know or find out that they can't use your browser for that, but for every other user that browser could be exactly what they need.
> without having to worry about a fuzzy and ever-expanding definition of what you have to support.
It's only ever-expanding if you're trying to keep up with the Jones's. You can define a subset of the web you want to support and build a clean, small browser that supports that.
It's ok if you don't like to use PWAs but that doesn't mean nobody does or that they're worthless.
But, importantly, they shouldn't lose their core functionality (if they're written well) because that's the "Progressive" part of PWA. If you don't use the feature or your browser doesn't support it, the website should still have basic functionality. One of the big ideas behind PWAs is "progressive enhancement", where you layer on features that may not be supported everywhere but add value when they are supported.
And a progressively built browser that doesn't implement every spec goes hand-in-hand with that. I think having more under-featured browsers like that would push webdevs into caring more about progressive enhancement.
I'm with you that allowing the clients to connect to a different sync server (gpodder, etc) would be a great feature. Though, again, I don't see that happening because it would cut into their subscription service.
That's subjective and exactly the type of thing that could be handled in a client. In both cases you're displaying the exact same data. A microblogging thread may be displayed as a flat list, but it's still a tree like a link aggregator thread.
> I meant a Facebook-style social network. So a platform to post what are essentially blog posts. In ActivityPub, that would be the Article type, which, according to the spec, has no semantic difference from Note. An Article could be created as a Note and vice versa with no semantic difference or loss of data. Just like above, the data is the same and the only distinction is the visual presentation of it.
https://pleroma.social/#featured-instances https://fediverse.party/en/pleroma/
Why not? it's text; you could make the same exact post on reddit and twitter (barring the length, which could be truncated in a federated context). Link aggregation is basically just microblogging with the extra constraint that the initial post has to have a link.
> Smithereen is a social network
What does this mean? Every other platform you mentioned are social networks. On all of these platforms, a user posts text or media posts. Displaying them in a different UI doesn't make them radically different.
The microblogging platforms ingest most types of posts from the other activitypub softwares, but the other platforms don't ingest posts from the (micro)blogging platforms. With the client-to-server API, the other platforms would just be clients on top of your Friendica account.
Because when activitypub was still getting off the ground, mastodon built their own client api. A lot of excited people built apps for mastodon so pleroma, and then others, started building Masto API support so that their instances could use mastodon clients. Now the Masto API is the de facto client api.
I super agree with you, using the client-to-server protocol so that we could have one account would be the best situation. I've been arguing that on the fediverse for a while, but all the developers in the space seem to think the client-to-server protocol isn't useful enough so you would have to fallback to a custom API for the missing pieces anyway so you might as well use the API everyone's already using.