IMHO no. I thought about this as I run a feed-reader and it would be cool to support ActivityPub as a feed protocol.
The main issue is that subscribing shows up on follower lists. Maybe for individual users this is fine but as I ran a service I didn't want to do this. I ended up with a number of reasons why ActivityPub push wouldn't work well.
1. I didn't want to appear to be advertising the service with a generic account subscribed to many feeds.
2. I didn't want a generic account to provide access to "followers only" toots to unintended users. To properly allow access approval I would need to put some subscriber info into the account. It would also be important to make sure that this can't be used as a form of spam (for example if I allowed them to put whatever name/message they wanted).
3. I didn't want to reveal who was subscribed to what.
4. I didn't want to have dozens of different accounts subscribed to popular feeds.
5. If the user also wants to comment on a post themselves they will need a separate account.
You can still poll a user's outbox like any other feed, but now you are back to an equivalent to Atom/RSS with no WebSub support. (I mean you could use WebSub, it works for any URL but no one does, and why would you when you already have ActivityPub for push?). So it seems that the anonymity of the older feed formats can be useful in some scenarios.
So in the end if I was just going to poll as any other feed format, and most services that support ActivityPub also have other feeds there was really no point to doing this. Feature requests welcome if there is a use case that I missed.
> So it seems that the anonymity of the older feed formats can be useful in some scenarios.
Huge understatement; it's more than just "some". None of the blogs in my feed reader are written by people that I have a public (reified) follower/followee connection with over social media. Nor do I have that kind of relationship with the authors of the books I check out from the library, for that matter.
I'm in the same boat, and came to the same conclusion.
One more point I'd add:
6. Not every ActivityPub enabled service allows for federation. (Some of the more popular block all federation, unless you get allowlisted). So you're stuck polling the outbox regardless.
The main issue is that subscribing shows up on follower lists. Maybe for individual users this is fine but as I ran a service I didn't want to do this. I ended up with a number of reasons why ActivityPub push wouldn't work well.
1. I didn't want to appear to be advertising the service with a generic account subscribed to many feeds.
2. I didn't want a generic account to provide access to "followers only" toots to unintended users. To properly allow access approval I would need to put some subscriber info into the account. It would also be important to make sure that this can't be used as a form of spam (for example if I allowed them to put whatever name/message they wanted).
3. I didn't want to reveal who was subscribed to what.
4. I didn't want to have dozens of different accounts subscribed to popular feeds.
5. If the user also wants to comment on a post themselves they will need a separate account.
You can still poll a user's outbox like any other feed, but now you are back to an equivalent to Atom/RSS with no WebSub support. (I mean you could use WebSub, it works for any URL but no one does, and why would you when you already have ActivityPub for push?). So it seems that the anonymity of the older feed formats can be useful in some scenarios.
So in the end if I was just going to poll as any other feed format, and most services that support ActivityPub also have other feeds there was really no point to doing this. Feature requests welcome if there is a use case that I missed.