search

snarfed / bridgy-fed

🌉 A bridge between decentralized social network protocols
https://fed.brid.gy
Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal
546 stars 29 forks source link

FR: Add Telegram channels as a source #1250

Closed imax9000 closed 4 days ago

imax9000 commented 1 month ago

Telegram channels conceptually are not that far from RSS feeds, so it might be possible to treat them in a similar fashion.

snarfed commented 1 month ago

Ooh yes, Telegram! I've always seen social networks as a somewhat different use case from messaging though. Technically, sure, you can bridge them, but it seems like bridging Telegram to Matrix, Signal, WhatsApp etc are more natural fits than eg fediverse or Bluesky. Or do I misunderstand Telegram?

qazmlp commented 1 month ago

Yes, Telegram channels are a lot closer to social media feeds or blogs than to classic instant messaging. The only real differences are that there's emoji reactions (well, Misskey etc. have those), stickers and optionally a separate discussion group.

Telegram also has discovery features, ads (with revenue sharing?), rich reshares, a web view accessible without login and increasing problems with being a misinformation and hate speech hub now, so a good way to look at it is a slimmer Facebook without user pages.

(Don't let that last part stop you, just keep in mind you might have to do moderation since it tolerates content that would get someone banned in other places. It's still a really polished general broadcast and marketing platform.)

snarfed commented 1 month ago

Thanks @qazmlp! I'm somewhat familiar with Telegram's moderation challenges, less familiar with the rest.

Next question is, is Telegram an open protocol? Or just a service with an API, like eg WhatsApp? I guess I thought it was the latter, but I don't know. My intent with Bridgy Fed is mainly open protocols, not just any service with an API. Bridgy classic does those, but only to/from web, not others.

qazmlp commented 1 month ago

Next question is, is Telegram an open protocol? Or just a service with an API, like eg WhatsApp? […]

https://telegram.org/faq#q-can-i-run-telegram-using-my-own-server:

Our architecture does not support federation yet. Telegram is a unified cloud service, so creating forks where two users might end up on two different Telegram clouds is unacceptable. To enable you to run your own Telegram server while retaining both speed and security is a task in itself. At the moment, we are undecided on whether or not Telegram should go in this direction.

It's a fully centralised service, possibly with the exception of their cryptocurrency.

wish13yt commented 2 weeks ago

Signal might be easier, as (I could be wrong) they have their own open protocol.

qazmlp commented 2 weeks ago

While Signal is preferable in almost every way, it's equally centralised and each new account requires a distinct phone number. It also doesn't support public channels due to its genuine privacy and encryption focus.

snarfed commented 4 days ago

Tentatively closing this one, Bridgy Fed is focused on open protocols, not platform APIs. Bridgy classic is maybe closer, but it only does IndieWeb <=> platform APIs, so it wouldn't bridge Telegram to/from fediverse or Bluesky either.

Could be an opportunity to build your own bridge! Happy to advise or help if you want to use libraries like arroba or granary!