Debating how to handle API usage with Loops, for the FYP, its essential that the client handles reporting specific analytics to the backend to improve the algo (ie: watch time, if you opened comments, share)
3rd party clients may not report that data, and I considered implementing Device Attestation to enforce only official apps, but why?
I'd rather encourage 3rd party devs to consume the FYP apis like the official app, and publish API docs
I think that's the way to go, wdyt?
#loops
https://mastodon.social/@dansup/113525787776519210
@dansup api docs would be fine. If a client were to not implement you can fall back to follows and likes as a baseline. Also just my 2 cents, I'm not against algorithms being fed with data like […]
@dansup I would argue that having the option for 3rd party clients or alternative clients is a key element to any open platform. While closed platforms can innovate faster in certain aspects […]
@dansup
I would not rely on clients. I don't think it is relevant how long a minute long video has been watched. Just count it on the server side. Same for comments I guess. Sharing could be […]
@dansup might open up to abuse too e.g. clients spamming the analytics and mess up the algo.
@dansup Probably not everybody will use 3rd party apps for Loops, but I think for those who do and for those apps that don't report that data, I'd respect that decision of the app since it is […]
@dansup As lots of sensible people have said, "Make Things Open, It Makes Them Better". Someone may build a completely privacy-focused app that doesn't report anything or improve the algorithm, […]
────
────