There is no better. Maybe they pick a name that’s more intuitive for you, but it’d be less intuitive for someone else.

They have a pronunciation guide in their FAQ on the website. There is no branding that would be obvious/intuitive to everyone

Not only are they federating with each other, but they implemented Group to Group following to help prevent duplicate posts. Its a feature that’s been requested for lemmy/kbin/mbin, so it’ll be interesting to see how well it works for them.

which makes it that Mastodon’s implementation will not be compatible with other fediverse implementations

What a surprise! I never would have expected Mastodon to ignore compatibility with the rest of the fediverse /s

But wait, there’s more, we’re standardizing our Groups implementation so other projects can take advantage of our App and Client API.

So its compatible with lemmy but uses a different API and they want their API to be the standard for the threadiverse? This is why we should be using the C2S, but since we’re not you should just stick with the lemmy api since that’s where the client ecosystem is already at.

I wish you luck and would love to see better Interoperability, but mastodon has been against better Article support from the beginning. I’m not sure much has changed there

The author wrote this FEP by reverse engineering the Hubzilla implementation. The point of proposing it is to find and answer questions like these.

OpenWebAuth has been in use on the fediverse since before WebFinger became so widely used.

Like I said in a previous comment, this FEP was written by reverse engineering the existing implementation. It’s still a proposal so it still has to go through a discussion period where issues like this can be worked out and it can be updated

In the southern United States, we have biscuits made with bacon grease and sausage rolls, which are just rolls with ground sausage baked into them.

It shouldn’t be this hard to implement a standard structure for social media (groups/channels/sub-reddits) with an allegedly standardised protocol.

Wait til you see mastodon’s proposed Group implementation, which they’re intentionally making incompatible with existing Group implementations

That’s not applicable. Sublinks is using the same standard as Lemmy/kbin/mbin, i.e. ActivityPub. In a decentralized system based on an open standard, plurality of implementations is a good thing. We shouldn’t want lemmy to be the only one.

There are 500 million posts on Twitter every day. Do you read them all? There are 2.8 million subreddits. Have you browsed them all?

Nobody subscribes to every twitter acct or every subreddit so nobody is expecting to have every single post delivered to them. The fediverse has a legitimate problem where ppl don’t actually receive all the posts of accts they’re subscribed to. It’s silly to compare what the OP is complaining about to not being able to see every post on twitter/reddit.

I use TiddlyWiki via TiddlyPWA. It’s an offline-capable PWA with a very quick sync capability. It works beautifully on my phone and desktop. It doesn’t have folders, but it does have nestable tags, which works really well for me. I don’t think it supports markdown out of the box, but I’m positive you can find a plugin for it. Plugins are crazy simple to install; you just drag and drop a link into you wiki tab and confirm installation.

They are different because most users weren’t aware of XMPP. They weren’t making a conscious choice to use an open standard. The fediverse, on the other hand, has grown specifically because people are seeing the value of an open ecosystem.

When google started removing XMPP support, users weren’t aware and didn’t care (other than losing contact with a few holdouts). If Meta implements AP support and then removes that support or modifies it so that it breaks some of expectations of the fediverse, most users will move to instances that don’t use Meta extensions. Meta can not take your instance or make it use their extensions, so an open fediverse will always exist.

Meta can not EEE the fediverse. The worst they can do is create their own distinct fediverse. But anyone who doesn’t want to participate will still be using the open fediverse. They can’t take your instance or force it to update to their standards.

But if you have to install an extension, how does this differ from current extension that already do this? What could the url scheme do that using http urls couldn’t?

It looks like I was mixing up some facts. The Genius case was denied because genius doesn’t own the copyright to the lyrics they were publishing. I can’t find the case now, but there was a case where a judge said scraping was allowed because it wasn’t a given that the scraper had read a ToS.

People who say that are generally talking about the signup where you have to pick an instance. And then there’s the worry over which other servers yours federates with. If you isolate your attention to a single instance, then all those worries go away.

The same already happens on the fediverse in regards to mastodon itself. A lot of people discuss the fediverse almost wholly in terms of mastodon.

They used it in a perfectly acceptable and understandable way. The definition you’re describing as sarcastic is an official meaning of the word. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/patronize

Genius (the lyrics company) tried to license the content on their website and a judge said that can’t be legally binding because there’s no guarantee the scraper read it. It seems like the same would apply here.