From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <e@80x24.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on dcvr.yhbt.net
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-ASN:  
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=3.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00,
	DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF shortcircuit=no
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
Received: from localhost (dcvr.yhbt.net [127.0.0.1])
	by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B60F61F47D;
	Tue,  7 Mar 2023 22:25:56 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=80x24.org;
	s=selector1; t=1678227956;
	bh=rToJX5s4MZ3sBGUjGuOWWlQyPKiMVyc2FEkhFTHp3FA=;
	h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From;
	b=h9Xbd/brg4wczXE3owIKtFT832komJVWnNVlXIe4kfIdF8Ii5zy3T7doOurSiNSfS
	 46NOaQsFusxexobt9Qj/QeB4Vg97QiCtxPGcd7bfm/8EpsFsm0qCS6uWaiJYQViqf0
	 Zde7zqNaIC84+S4EyZvBClKfu3kznA3fFSNWYLmo=
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2023 22:25:56 +0000
From: Eric Wong <e@80x24.org>
To: Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: meta@public-inbox.org
Subject: Re: ActivityPub <=> email bridge?
Message-ID: <20230307222556.M602610@dcvr>
References: <20190330014915.o2hw333fjotxkrjy@dcvr>
 <20230307221210.M598524@dcvr>
 <20230307221735.arhy7xt6ciz5djni@meerkat.local>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230307221735.arhy7xt6ciz5djni@meerkat.local>
List-Id: <meta.public-inbox.org>

Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 07, 2023 at 10:12:10PM +0000, Eric Wong wrote:
> > > Something tells me that if ActivityPub reaches high-enough
> > > adoption levels; it'll have to deal with a spam problem that
> > > email folks have been dealing with for decades, too.
> > > 
> > > So ActivityPub seems like a duplicated effort as far as it's use
> > > for messaging for software development goes...
> > 
> > Still true, but it seems to have caught on, lately...
> > 
> > If we manage to try this, it'll be using AP as a transport layer
> > and still requiring plain-text and RFC5322 (or 822/2822) plain-text
> > messages compatible with git-am.
> 
> I'm not sure about the bridge, but I would very much welcome ability to
> archive activitypub messages in a public-inbox archive, with full threading.

*shrug* email messages may be able to reach a wider audience via AP.

> > That would allow SpamAssassin or similar to perform spam
> > filtering w/o modification.
> > 
> > Allowing markup or images from arbitrary posters is a nightmare
> > in terms of spam, phishing and illegal content, though; so
> > normal mailing list etiquette still applies.
> 
> Perhaps it's possible to allow attachments from specific instances, but the
> default for any federated content is just plaintext content?

Yes, basically anything acceptable to the existing mail community.

I realize sometimes people will need to post photos of failed
boot attempts, so I think those should be federated, too[1] but
absolutely NOT displayed by default in any UI.

[1] especially if they can be fetched via git