Very cool but I would like to be able to create an account with my mail address instead of using a Mastodon account because I am trying to avoid social media.

It looks like there's an RSS feed at the bottom. If you don't want to use the social aspects of the site, maybe just use that in an RSS reader?

*Link: https://bubbles.town/rss

The briefing pages also have RSS, this way you see the most relevant stuff https://bubbles.town/editions

Hmmz the "briefing" rss feed can't be filtered by "minimum votes", i believe...?

The briefing rss feed contains one entry per day with a link to that days briefing page. The briefing itself cannot be customized, it's the same for everybody.

For the list views you can use the filter menu to filter by min votes or subscribe to any of the min vote rss feeds.

I do NOT consider the Fediverse and the myriads of implementations of it to be social media, but rather a social web. More like websites with the abilities to communicate and interact in different and interesting ways.

Social media is dead, and has been for a while. Many use it still, but it is not primarily social. The social part was mainly a ploy to get peoples attention and then badly abusing it in ever more creative and sinister ways.

To me, social web == social media.

I don't use Facebook but use it for auth when I have no other option.

Even worse, I don't want an external service federating my identity when I can avoid it. We have all heard of people getting locked out in cases where Google decided to ban a user from their platform.

I'm never trusting an external provider again.

Exactly! It is so empowering to host my own instance at home and own my own identity online, using GoToSocial.

I haven't tried but in principle you only need a Mastodon compatible authentication, there are other services that are not twitter clones. See for example https://fedi.tips/what-other-kinds-of-servers-are-on-the-fed... or more complete https://fediverse.observer/allsoftwares

I can't speak to other fediverse software but I tried a few lemmy servers to no avail. My mastodon instance is under maintenance so I guess I'll have to wait until that's done to sign up.

+1 to this. Apple sign-in would be ideal, since it maps to single-identity more cleanly than a social media system.

Bug.

?

Consolidating your online activity to a single ID is a bug.

1. It enables correlation, tracking, and stalking across sites.

2. It makes people vulnerable to being locked out of that single-ID provider.

3. It makes people vulnerable across multiple services to a compromise of that single-ID provider.

4. It risks alleged abuse at any one service relying on the single-ID provider causing problems with other services, or the SIDP itself. Reputation attacks, Joe Jobs, and the like become attack vectors.

5. In the specific case of Apple, the represented population is small enough that sites relying on it would exclude a huge number of people, if there were no other alternatives.

I'm of an age and from a time in which one didn't use one's real name online, with very rare exceptions, and in which compartmentalising activities into different independent services. Service consolidation, where a small set of ogolopolistic actors snap up previously independent companies, and then decide to forcibly integrate those services, is yet another problem. One of the highest-voted HN submissions I've been associated with was my own report of this happening, 13 years ago, on Google+: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6746731>. (The submission was by @davidgerard, but was based on my own G+ experience.) The original G+ content is archived here: <https://web.archive.org/web/20120118044728/https://plus.goog...>. NB: the discussion on that thread is quite interesting.

Relevance being I've been following this practice for a long time. Well before the G+ post mentioned as well.

The backstory on that post: not only had Google integrated previously independent G+ and YouTube accounts, but it did so based on email address, often linking real-name and pseudonymous accounts. Several people found themselves outed in different, and more significant ways, including revealing personal, social, political, or other aspects with public and professional accounts.

I'd already preempted this to a large extent by acting when I first heard the "Google+ is an identity network" comment by then-Google CEO Eric Schmidt to NPR reporter Andy Carvin in an impromptu and unscheduled interview, in 2011. I deleted the several-weeks-old personally-identifying G+ account, and employed my "dredmorbius" persona to create a new account.

See "Google+ is an identity service, says Schmidt" <https://www.marketplace.org/story/2011/08/29/google-identity...> based on the G+ account by Carvin, archived here: <https://web.archive.org/web/20111015105327/https://plus.goog...>.

Online identifiers serve multiple purposes. I don't mind having a persistent identity as "dredmorbius" or occasionally "Doc Edward Morbius" (I've deliberately avoided using "Dr." for some time to avoid falsely claiming any unwarranted credentials). But where I don't care to have that association made, I have, or create, other independent aliases.

My general feeling is that ID systems should be at a minimum-viable-level basis, and largely a separate consideration from another often-conflated aspect, reputation.

1. Not in the case of Apple, since you get a unique key that's only usable for your service.

2. Did anyone say something about "only" here that I missed? I just want it added.

Everything else you wrote seems based on a significant misinterpretation of what I suggested. Maybe... ask a question next time?

So, question: is AppleID based on OAuth? And yeah, I'm underinformed on these, though I'll stand by at least some of my concerns applying.

Amongst the problems of adding a megacorp's identification protocols is that those have a strong tendency to embrace, extend, and extinguish (<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...>). See what's happened to email, RCS messaging, and for that matter, online and social services themselves.

Again, the federated Mastodon poses a far lesser risk of this, though if that project were to be compromised it could go pear-shaped.

I'm curios why you are avoiding social media?

Mostly because the "damn this is interesting" to "i don't care what you ate yesterday" ratio is not good enough to spend my time on it. These days I am much more enjoying exploring gopher holes, reading and writing blog posts. For realtime communications, I prefer IRC. For me, social media sits in between chatting and publishing content and is therefore neither fish nor fowl.

> I'm curios why you are avoiding social media?

You make it sound as if that's undesirable.

Because there’s little good about it

Its a scam

I do NOT consider the Fediverse and the myriads of implementations of it to be social media, but rather a social web. More like websites with the abilities to communicate and interact in different and interesting ways.

Social media is dead, and has been for a while. Many use it still, but it is not primarily social. The social part was mainly a ploy to get peoples attention and then badly abusing it in ever more creative and sinister ways.

EDIT: This comment was meant to be posted to the parent comment!

Email the mods and ask them to detach and relocate it.