* Revert "Fix filtering of favourited_by, reblogged_by, followers and following (#10447)"

This reverts commit 120544067f.

* Revert "Hide blocking accounts from blocked users (#10442)"

This reverts commit 62bafa20a1.

* Improve blocked view of profiles

- Change "You are blocked" to "Profile unavailable"
- Hide following/followers in API when blocked
- Disable follow button and show "Profile unavailable" on public profile as well

* Revert "Add indication that you have been blocked in web UI (#10420)"

This reverts commit bd02ec6daa.

* Revert "Add `blocked_by` relationship to the REST API (#10373)"

This reverts commit 9745de883b.

* Hide blocking accounts from search results

* Filter blocking accouts from account followers

* Filter blocking accouts from account's following accounts

* Filter blocking accounts from “reblogged by” and “favourited by” lists

* Remove blocking account from URL search

* Return 410 on trying to fetch user data from a user who blocked us

* Return 410 in /api/v1/account/statuses for suspended or blocking accounts

* Fix status filtering when performing URL search

* Restore some React improvements

Restore some cleanup from bd02ec6daa

* Refactor by adding `without_blocking` scope

* Break out nested relationship API keys

This closes #5856 by restoring the existing behavior of the `muting`
and `following` keys (returning booleans rather than truthy or false).
It adds `showing_reblogs` and `muting_notifications` keys:

* `showing_reblogs` returns true if:
  1. You've requested to follow the user, with reblogs shown, or
  2. You are following the user, with reblogs shown.
* `muting_notifications` returns true if you have muted the user and
  their notifications as well.

* Rubocop fix

* Fix pulling reblog/mute status from relationships

I could swear this had passed tests before, but apparently not.
Works now.

* More test fixes

Really, you'd expect this to be more straightforward.

* Fix JavaScript interface with long IDs

Somewhat predictably, the JS interface handled IDs as numbers, which in
JS are IEEE double-precision floats. This loses some precision when
working with numbers as large as those generated by the new ID scheme,
so we instead handle them here as strings. This is relatively simple,
and doesn't appear to have caused any problems, but should definitely
be tested more thoroughly than the built-in tests. Several days of use
appear to support this working properly.

BREAKING CHANGE:

The major(!) change here is that IDs are now returned as strings by the
REST endpoints, rather than as integers. In practice, relatively few
changes were required to make the existing JS UI work with this change,
but it will likely hit API clients pretty hard: it's an entirely
different type to consume. (The one API client I tested, Tusky, handles
this with no problems, however.)

Twitter ran into this issue when introducing Snowflake IDs, and decided
to instead introduce an `id_str` field in JSON responses. I have opted
to *not* do that, and instead force all IDs to 64-bit integers
represented by strings in one go. (I believe Twitter exacerbated their
problem by rolling out the changes three times: once for statuses, once
for DMs, and once for user IDs, as well as by leaving an integer ID
value in JSON. As they said, "If you’re using the `id` field with JSON
in a Javascript-related language, there is a very high likelihood that
the integers will be silently munged by Javascript interpreters. In most
cases, this will result in behavior such as being unable to load or
delete a specific direct message, because the ID you're sending to the
API is different than the actual identifier associated with the
message." [1]) However, given that this is a significant change for API
users, alternatives or a transition time may be appropriate.

1: https://blog.twitter.com/developer/en_us/a/2011/direct-messages-going-snowflake-on-sep-30-2011.html

* Additional fixes for stringified IDs in JSON

These should be the last two. These were identified using eslint to try
to identify any plain casts to JavaScript numbers. (Some such casts are
legitimate, but these were not.)

Adding the following to .eslintrc.yml will identify casts to numbers:

~~~
  no-restricted-syntax:
  - warn
  - selector: UnaryExpression[operator='+'] > :not(Literal)
    message: Avoid the use of unary +
  - selector: CallExpression[callee.name='Number']
    message: Casting with Number() may coerce string IDs to numbers
~~~

The remaining three casts appear legitimate: two casts to array indices,
one in a server to turn an environment variable into a number.

* Back out RelationshipsController Change

This was made to make a test a bit less flakey, but has nothing to
do with this branch.

* Change internal streaming payloads to stringified IDs as well

Per
https://github.com/tootsuite/mastodon/pull/5019#issuecomment-330736452
we need these changes to send deleted status IDs as strings, not
integers.