Talk:ActivityPub

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the ActivityPub article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Internet Low‑importance

	Internet portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Computing: Software / Free and open-source software Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by Free and open-source software (assessed as Mid-importance).

Computer science Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Computer science related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Computer scienceWikipedia:WikiProject Computer scienceTemplate:WikiProject Computer scienceComputer science articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Things you can help WikiProject Computer science with:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests :
- Requested articles/Applied arts and sciences/Computer science, computing, and Internet
Cleanup :
- Computer science articles needing attention
- Computer science articles needing expert attention
Copyedit :
- Computing
Expand :
- Computer science
Infobox :
- Computer science articles without infoboxes
Maintain :
- Timeline of computing 2020–present
Photo :
- Find pictures for the biographies of computer scientists (see List of computer scientists)
- Computing articles needing images
Stubs :
- Computer science stubs
Unreferenced :
- WikiProject Computer science/Unreferenced BLPs
Project-related :
- Tag all relevant articles in Category:Computer science and sub-categories with {{WikiProject Computer science}}

It is my intent to begin writing the text for the ActivityPub page to eventually have ActivityPub have its own page instead of redirecting to Pump.io as it currently does. Algotruneman (talk) 14:14, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The articles linked in the "See Also" section may not contain references to ActivityPub. Algotruneman (talk) 20:43, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If not, that's because those pages need updating too, to reflect the fact that the ActivityPub spec has been published, and developers are busy working on implementing it. Danylstrype (talk) 16:46, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of implementations discussion[edit]

If a particular entry on this list is deemed not notable enough then remove that entry specifically. Stop removing the entire list. Many entries on here such as Pleroma and PeerTube are quite notable. If a short list of examples is desired perhaps we could instead rename the section to "Notable Implementations" rather than "List of Implementations" and include some more detailed entries for a few key items that we decide are major examples. The short-list that this section keeps getting reverted to is a strange mix of major and minor implementations and creates the false impression that the standard is not used by anything notable but Mastodon, which is not the case. The last reversion cited the guidelines on stand-alone lists to justify it. This is not a stand-alone list. Even if the guideline applied, this list meets CSC criteria 3: A short list less than 32K of every verifiable member of the group. --50.255.129.225 (talk) 19:39, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've not removed the entire list. WP:BURDEN on Plemora and PeerTube. Reminder: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a directory. Please add reliable sources (independent, third party) establishing notability, or possibly link more specifically to the activitypub.rocks list in external section. activitypub.rocks is part of W3C and the ActivityPub standard. 84.250.17.211 (talk) 15:43, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
WP:EL too. The software listed should have its own article or be expected to be created soon, if WP:REDLINK. 84.250.17.211 (talk) 15:44, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I understand the "Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a directory" rationale, but IMHO it's a silly excuse for removing information from a Wikipedia article when a) it's a non-controversial fact about the subject, and b) removing it results in an article that leaves readers misinformed about the subject. This is a common problem on articles about new internet tech, because it is too new to have generated many (accurate) secondary sources (see the talk page for Mastodon for an example). Having a representative list of ActivityPub implementations is necessary to give the reader an accurate impression of the variety of software supporting ActivityPub, and the current truncated list does not achieve this.

Having ActivityPub support mentioned the homepage or source code repository (on GH or wherever) of a project on the list is sufficient to ensure this article's accuracy. If this is not sufficient for Wikipedia's sources standard, or formatting standard, I would appreciate an explanation of why. --Danylstrype (talk) 15:35, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List cleaned up again: Special:Diff/965228693. The external links point to a more extensive list, already. 84.250.17.211 (talk) 04:05, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pump.io as implementation?[edit]

Pump.io is a predecessor to activitypub, but should not be listed as an implementation. Baldersmash (talk) 22:40, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The official documentation of W3C is also not listing Pump.io as THE source of the ActivityPub Protocol! They refer on the ActivityStreams 2.0 data format as its base. See [| ActivityPub W3C recommendation] --Vilby (talk) 14:54, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nextcloud as a activitypub implementation?[edit]

Nextcloud doesn't have any activitypub implementation, am i missing something or should this be fixed? 92.250.97.24 (talk) 21:43, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://nextcloud.com/blog/no-need-to-trust-musk-we-go-federated-with-nextcloud-social/ 95.90.241.175 (talk) 21:52, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ActivityPub has been deemed "Unreliable"[edit]

@Njradcliffe and HLHJ: User:David Gerard and User:Maddy from Celeste are claiming that ActivityPub is WP:SPS and is therefore unreliable and cannot be cited in the Wikipedia article on Mastodon (social network) -- and presumably anyplace else. See talk:Mastodon (social network)#Tagging re. {{unreliable sources}}. If you agree this is appropriate, do nothing. If you think, like I do, that this is inappropriate censorship, then I recommend you join the discussion on the Mastodon talk page and elsewhere. Thanks, DavidMCEddy (talk) 18:59, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

SNAC2 is here to stay...[edit]

Code: https://codeberg.org/grunfink/snac2

Author: https://comam.es/snac/grunfink

2003:DD:6F4B:5E34:825:1895:73E3:FBBA (talk) 22:52, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps add ciritism of desigh issues section?[edit]

Activity pub has many implementation iissues including:

- Sending cross instance data is super inefficient. There is no request batching and a new message has to be sent to each person seeing said message resulting in tons of lag and delay in messages showing up.

- Fake instances allow easy DDOSing of instances by making fake instances which follow a lot of accounts and the above issue makes this very effective.

- Encryption is deployed in public messages which is totally unnecessary and causes issues.

- And more.

There has been critisism about these and other design issues that activitypub has and it has been a barrier in the adoption of the technology so adding a section detailing the critism would be a good fit. H44dyss9900 (talk) 21:52, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

kbin[edit]

kbin claims to support ActivityPub, https://kbin.pub/en but this needs investigation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.126.37.22 (talk) 16:46, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, kbin.social able to federates with lemmy.world https://lemmy.world/post/594445 Dorakuthelekor (talk) 09:57, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mbin self promo.[edit]

I'll be reverting last 2 edits done by User:Danger89 to lgv 1181824829, Seems like he is behind the kbin fork Dorakuthelekor (talk) 12:19, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]