What is Hackers' Pub?

Hackers' Pub is a place for software engineers to share their knowledge and experience with each other. It's also an ActivityPub-enabled social network, so you can follow your favorite hackers in the fediverse and get their latest posts in your feed.

0
0
0
2

After reviewing FEP-5624: Per-object reply control policies and GoToSocial's interaction policy spec, I find myself leaning toward the latter for long-term considerations, though both have merit.

FEP-5624 is admirably focused and simpler to implement, which I appreciate. However, 's approach seems to offer some architectural advantages:

  1. The three-tier permission model (allow/require approval/deny) feels more flexible than binary allow/deny
  2. Separating approval objects from interactions appears more secure against forgery
  3. The explicit handling of edge cases (mentioned users, post authors) provides clearer semantics
  4. The extensible framework allows for handling diverse interaction types, not just replies

I wonder if creating an that extracts GoToSocial's interaction policy design into a standalone standard might be worthwhile. It could potentially serve as a more comprehensive foundation for access control in .

This is merely my initial impression though. I'd be curious to hear other developers' perspectives on these approaches.

4
0

After reviewing FEP-5624: Per-object reply control policies and GoToSocial's interaction policy spec, I find myself leaning toward the latter for long-term considerations, though both have merit.

FEP-5624 is admirably focused and simpler to implement, which I appreciate. However, 's approach seems to offer some architectural advantages:

  1. The three-tier permission model (allow/require approval/deny) feels more flexible than binary allow/deny
  2. Separating approval objects from interactions appears more secure against forgery
  3. The explicit handling of edge cases (mentioned users, post authors) provides clearer semantics
  4. The extensible framework allows for handling diverse interaction types, not just replies

I wonder if creating an that extracts GoToSocial's interaction policy design into a standalone standard might be worthwhile. It could potentially serve as a more comprehensive foundation for access control in .

This is merely my initial impression though. I'd be curious to hear other developers' perspectives on these approaches.

4
0
0

After reviewing FEP-5624: Per-object reply control policies and GoToSocial's interaction policy spec, I find myself leaning toward the latter for long-term considerations, though both have merit.

FEP-5624 is admirably focused and simpler to implement, which I appreciate. However, 's approach seems to offer some architectural advantages:

  1. The three-tier permission model (allow/require approval/deny) feels more flexible than binary allow/deny
  2. Separating approval objects from interactions appears more secure against forgery
  3. The explicit handling of edge cases (mentioned users, post authors) provides clearer semantics
  4. The extensible framework allows for handling diverse interaction types, not just replies

I wonder if creating an that extracts GoToSocial's interaction policy design into a standalone standard might be worthwhile. It could potentially serve as a more comprehensive foundation for access control in .

This is merely my initial impression though. I'd be curious to hear other developers' perspectives on these approaches.

4
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
1

After reviewing FEP-5624: Per-object reply control policies and GoToSocial's interaction policy spec, I find myself leaning toward the latter for long-term considerations, though both have merit.

FEP-5624 is admirably focused and simpler to implement, which I appreciate. However, 's approach seems to offer some architectural advantages:

  1. The three-tier permission model (allow/require approval/deny) feels more flexible than binary allow/deny
  2. Separating approval objects from interactions appears more secure against forgery
  3. The explicit handling of edge cases (mentioned users, post authors) provides clearer semantics
  4. The extensible framework allows for handling diverse interaction types, not just replies

I wonder if creating an that extracts GoToSocial's interaction policy design into a standalone standard might be worthwhile. It could potentially serve as a more comprehensive foundation for access control in .

This is merely my initial impression though. I'd be curious to hear other developers' perspectives on these approaches.

4
1
3
0

There was that story last month about the Turks demanding that certain opposition Bluesky accounts be silenced. They were (mostly, sort of, it’s complicated). I dug into it and came away with an essay on what we want and don’t want concerning censorship or no-censorship and how well and the might give us that: tbray.org/ongoing/When/202x/20

0
0
0
0
0
0
0

@ianthetechieIan Wagner @panda @gamingonlinuxLiam @ GamingOnLinux 🐧🎮
Great to see more people making the jump! I have finally completely switched to Ubuntu - Mint was not an option because it is not supported by an application which is critical for my work, but Ubuntu works like a charm. Boot-up is also much faster than Win.
It took me a bit of effort (and some help from ChatGPT) to get everything up and running (I kept Win on the machine as dual boot, as backup in case in the future I have some critical compatibility issue), but I'm happy with the result.
In some cases the UX of certain apps is suboptimal, but that's because I'm trying to switch out of as many US providers as possible, and MSFT/Google environments currently have good alternatives, but not as seamlessly integrated.

0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
3
0
1
0

今日この頃、コピーガードの方式がまた新しくなってぽくてラップトップで映画が見れなくなった。

そもそも海賊版を作成する人々はハードウェアを偽装したりしてコピーするんだから一般のユーザーが不利益を被っているだけに見える。

例えば通常通りBlu-rayレコーダーで再生してHDCPの無効化すればどんなにダビング規制を強めたり暗号化しても無意味である。

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0