I run three services (Mastodon, Pixelfed, WriteFreely) and would like to have my community use one set of credentials on all three (and any other service they would like to) - is this what I'm understanding is the intent here? I want to run more services but I simply cannot stomach yet more credentials.
> Does Solid mean we won’t need so many passwords?
> Yes. When you use Solid, you only need to login to your Identity Provider. You can then use applications that interact with your Pod without logging in each of them individually, which is (in our opinion) simpler than having to create accounts on each and every service. However, you will still have to manage what data you would like to share with each application.
That is right :) one credential / account for all instances, we function as third party OAuth provider, it's possible to integrate as long as your platform can integrate allows authenticating through OAuth. We offer a few other features as well but they're not readily supported by Mastodon yet atm, ideally we'd love to centralize user relationships as well so that you won't have to rebuild your friends and followers list on every platform.
Centralizing the decentralized... what's old is new again?
Seems like the centralization of relationships and credentials ought to be client-side, or a portable protocol all its own, so we don't repeat the mistake of centralizing the most-important data.
> Centralizing the decentralized... what's old is new again?
haha you're not wrong, but imo this is a critical part to centralize though. I haven't seen an easy to use (wallet not required) and trusted solution yet for decentralizing auth. Maybe it's underway and I'd be happy to adopt that once it's good.
IndieAuth[1] is a slick DNS-based approach. Maybe offering that as a service would be a nice alternative. I point my DNS to you, and you handle authentication for everything that uses IndieAuth. If you go away or I don't like what you're doing then I can point my DNS to someone else offering that service and I retain the same DNS identity, and ability to use it to login anywhere I've set it up as my identity.
IndieAuth.com[2] sort of does this already, but it delegates to a "social" login (Facebook/Twitter/Github/Google/etc).
One can readily argue that it is simultaneously the most-important part to decentralize. Identity and personal-network are essential to a person's function in modern society.
That might be a possibility (it's not supported now though, we're still really really early stage) but I'm not opposed to that suggestion. This would work well if your network is pretty established already and folks trust your platform instead of trusting the authenticator first.
Agreed. I've been pasting this anywhere I see the frustration
Think of it like your phone number, it's a service and you need a provider. Choose one by location https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/mastodon-near-me_828094 makes no difference, they all talk to each other and you can move servers at any time
And it's curated for servers that are open for registration so hopefully no dead ends
>no conspiracy theory has yet emerged arguing that the Empire never really fell at all, and that everywhere from Carlisle to Cairo is still secretly being run by an emperor hidden somewhere under Rome. Which is a pity, because that would be brilliant.
For my family's semi-rural home I'm seeing that I can buy 0.5m (500cm) imagery from the last year for $250. No historical images with higher resolution I can buy. To task a new a photo at 40cm resolution would cost $1,800.00 from KOMPSAT-3A. (and it'd be a 10km x 10km area)
>Twitter's motives to suspend an account for reporting court proceedings
It's clear Twitter suspended the account for TOS violations, and not the subject matter.
I have no dog in this fight, do not follow the case, but a quick search of Twitter yielded these not-suspended accounts that are "reporting court proceedings" as you say:
So, @hxkandbe's request that we use the suspended account's blog post about the suspension to add some context and clarity is in no way suppressing the discussion, but instead seeking to elevate and inform it.
It's always TOS violations when convenient. Plenty of accounts violate TOS and go untouched.
Not casting judgment on this specific case, but the ease with which it's possible to selectively apply TOS to bans should be concerning to free speech oriented people.
Just make a broad TOS and you can ban anybody you like.
>Hospitals set their prices above what most insurance companies will pay to make sure they get the maximum amount from the insurance company
Tis is generally not as simple. There are two prices that matter to this conversation: the hospital chargemaster and the usual and customary rate (UCR). The two are not functionally intertwined. The chargemaster exists in the hospital back office as a legal fiction and has little to no relationship to anything the insurance companies do although yes, sometimes chargemasters may be used as part of the rate negotiation with insurers. UCR is governed by what it says on the tin, it is what the market is paying in the specific geography.
The shenanigans kick in when the hospital tries to do something with the fictional difference between their chargemaster and the UCR, or, worse, tries to charge the fictional price to uninsured and under-insured individuals.
Given that all the current HHS political appointees have handed in their resignation letters for use in less than two days, "current administration" will become inaccurate during the lifecycle of these comments - maybe that's the reason for clarification
