I don’t quite understand a lot of the details on how the implementations work.

In what ways is AT better or worse than ActivityPub? Are there different versions of ActivityPub? Are there improvements coming to either to make them better (or compatible)?

My current understanding is

  • AT makes it easier to move accounts (according to them), but AT is controlled and maintained by BlueSky, and they are a for-profit company that can mess with the protocol in the future, which goes against the central idea of decentralized social media

What other cool technical details are there?

  • Flaky@iusearchlinux.fyi
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’ll try to explain to the best of my ability, from having used both and figuring things out.

    On Atproto, the federation is very much more on the backend, where the Personal Data Servers are interlinked and people access the protocol through bsky.app or some other app they wish to use. They have started rolling out the infrastructure to allow federation between different PDSs and have started moving user data to them. They’ve made for a more predictable, consistent federated experience (which has been a criticism of the ActivityPub’s fediverse), and allowed for a more resilient infrastructure, but unfortunately it’s limited to what Bluesky wants which is just microblogging while ActivityPub is more flexible (see: Mastodon, Lemmy, Funkwhale, PeerTube, Wordpress, etc.) but has the cultural issue of people treating their instance like their own personal forum and not a critical part of the fediverse’s infrastructure.

    • iso@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      What makes AT protocol “more predictable, consistent”? I cannot find a detailed article about the protocol except empty hype articles.

      • Flaky@iusearchlinux.fyi
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Well for one, if a feature is implemented in Atproto, it’ll be implemented for the entire federated network. With ActivityPub, there’s inconsistency with the features (You still need Glitch-soc if you want Mastodon with text formatting, for instance) and, while yes it’s cool that I can talk to Lemmy from my Mastodon account, it’s quite a clunky experience IMO and shouldn’t be a selling point to the regular user who just wants to post about what they’re doing.

        A technical overview of Atproto can be retrieved here.

      • poVoq@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        My current understanding from reading some 3rd party articles is that AT employs a DAG to synchronize messages more consistently.

        AP has a different model that has some downsides in regards to consistency, but it should be significantly more resource efficient and have better recovery from failure modes.

        • iso@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          So in AT, unlike in AP, activity takes place between multiple servers and not only two servers 🤔

    • timconspicuous@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      unfortunately it’s limited to what Bluesky wants which is just microblogging while ActivityPub is more flexible (see: Mastodon, Lemmy, Funkwhale, PeerTube, Wordpress, etc.)

      One of the bsky devs has clarified that they do want peertube/wordpress/lemmy type sites to exist on the protocol as well