I just sent the final proofs of the #ActivityPub book to the editors at O'Reilly.
I'm done; with this part, at least.
I am not sure what I'm going to do with all that surplus time. I should probably start a huge new project!
I turned in my manuscript at the end of May; we've done 5 rounds of edits since then. Making books is hard!
You can still read the pre-release version on O'Reilly Learning Platform for free with a 10-day trial of the service. I don't know how much longer that deal is going to be around.
https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/activitypub/9781098162733/
@evan congrats! Just a curiosity, is there a comparison with other protocols trying to create an interoperable web? I'm trying to understand why AT Protocol was created. I still need to read some references some people shared here.
@everton137 it was created because Jack Dorsey thought Twitter could spin out a business with a protocol as a product. They would connect big social networks, using the Twitter user and content base as an enticement. Those networks would pay BS to develop and maintain the pipes connecting servers.
@everton137 using an existing open standard wouldn't work for this business model, because those big social networks could connect without paying anything to BS. They needed to make a new, incompatible protocol that other businesses had to pay for.
@everton137 Twitter gave them $13M, and they raised another $8M. They've spent that money developing their proprietary protocol. I don't think it's a successful strategy. They are shooting the moon; hoping to be successful at all other developers' expense.
@everton137 my knowledge of this is firsthand. I talked with Parag, then CTO of Twitter, about it when BS first started. He laid out the entire business plan for me. I was part of the BS community that discussed different protocols to use.
@everton137 I don't agree that the primary motivations for starting BS were technical, in response to AP's failings. I don't think it's fair for BS people to position it that way.
@evan your points shared here deserve an article.
@everton137 I've already written about BlueSky and what a dangerous distraction it is.
@evan @everton137 bummed that you have such a negative public take on atproto and Bluesky and see it as antagonistic and "dangerous".
I have a huge respect for ActivityPub and the folks involved, including you. I think we are all working towards the same goals, there is no final word on protocols/architecture/governance/regulation in this space, and that there is a lot of room for collaboration.
@evan @everton137 even if folks don't trust Jay and the Bluesky board (who are the relevant individuals and stakeholders-holders for the future of the org), we are working in the open and everybody can read and learn from our experiments, successes, and failures. We totally endorse inter-operation efforts like bridgy fed, and collaboration on overlapping needs like identity systems, OAuth, and E2EE.
@bnewbold @evan @everton137 rather than endorse @bsky.brid.gy how about first class support for bi directional bridging?
Edit: I should probably say "in addition to" not "rather than"
Hey, Bryan. I like that BlueSky, the social network, is an active part of the Fediverse through BridgyFed.
@evan @bnewbold @everton137 Btw, remember how you wrote on Threads in mid February that you think there's maybe 30% chance that the Bluesky network won't die before they allow bridges like this to connect to the Fediverse?
@bnewbold @everton137 I moderated some of the language in this thread.
Yeah really. AT's got a different target than ActivityPub, so has made different tradeoffs. As a result, there are lots of potential synergies between AT's "big world" focus and AP's scoped visibility and increasing corporate adoption. It's great for the Fediverse that Bluesky provides a good big-world Twitter alternative. At the same time, though, there's a lot more to social networking than big-world Twitter alternatives, and that's where today's Fediverse really shines.