Skavau
@Skavau@piefed.social
- Comment on PieFed 1.4 is released - emoji, federated stackoverflow and AI content filters 7 hours ago:
Yeah, Reddit is oversized itself. I think there’s way more advancements and functions that should take priority over outreach specifically anyway. It needs a lot more tools if it was to become a broadly much busier service.
- Comment on PieFed 1.4 is released - emoji, federated stackoverflow and AI content filters 9 hours ago:
No, I want the Fediverse to get bigger. I don’t necessarily think its desirable to become anywhere near the size of Reddit though.
Nor do I think its even possible. I don’t know anyone here who has arrived who has been met with “hostility” just for arriving so I have no idea what you’re talking about.
- Comment on PieFed 1.4 is released - emoji, federated stackoverflow and AI content filters 10 hours ago:
All of the “features” you are giving as “superior” are meaningless, if the Fediverse is only interesting/useful for 0.1% of the overall population. I don’t care about moral superiority. I will not consider the Fediverse “beyond” anything on any front until TikTok, Reddit, Instagram, Bluesky, et al are irrelevant as tools for mass communication.
This is a weird standard to hold, and certainly not something anyone on here holds.
No-one thinks Lemmy/Piefed or theFediverse more broadly has the logistics, funding or capacity to supplant them.
- Comment on PieFed 1.4 is released - emoji, federated stackoverflow and AI content filters 2 days ago:
Has that happened yet?
- Comment on PieFed 1.4 is released - emoji, federated stackoverflow and AI content filters 2 days ago:
Sorry, I meant in the sense of privacy from the perspective of other users. Your voting history cannot be seen by other users on Reddit, and you can hide your comment history from them too. I think these are bad decisions, but at the same time some people on the fediverse have voiced support for them.
- Comment on PieFed 1.4 is released - emoji, federated stackoverflow and AI content filters 2 days ago:
This is tyranny of the majority. If one person is out there saying “I don’t want to have the data I’ve posted on server A to be presented as if I posted on server B”, then this person will be right to complain if they see their requests being respected.
Well we already have ‘tyranny of the majority’ here regarding a whole host of functions on the fediverse. On reddit voting is entirely private, mod-logs hidden and people now can even hide their posting history. I am sure a non-zero amount of people here object to that (I know some do). But there’s no support for changing that due to the belief prevalent across the fediverse that these being publicly accessible keep the fediverse honest.
This is tyranny of the majority. If one person is out there saying “I don’t want to have the data I’ve posted on server A to be presented as if I posted on server B”, then this person will be right to complain if they see their requests being respected.
Maybe one could have an opt-out toggle in users profiles for potential community migration. Ultimately, I’m in favour of (if this functionality ever actually exists to completely move a community) being widely known. People would join the fediverse knowing that there’s a possibility that the community they’re posting on could, down-the-line, move to another instance and thus ‘move’ their posts and comments within that community.
And I’m just replying to your points from a community perspective. You’re welcome to reply or not.
- Comment on PieFed 1.4 is released - emoji, federated stackoverflow and AI content filters 2 days ago:
Then why restrict this logic to “like/dislike” activities, and not extend to any type of activity?
Some communities are also, or can be set to local only. What other activities do you have in mind?
A mitigation is not a proper solution, even less so when it violates other principles in distributed systems.
So far as I can see, that’s up to the collective fediverse population. You done a poll on this?
The harm itself will be for the instance admin later on. Still, the larger point is this solution is a workaround that does not bring any meaningful benefit for others in the Fediverse.
It’s not supposed to in this context. It’s for an instance admin who wants to populate the content of their own instance. Although it could be beneficial if it’s an instance for others that is not personal in scope and is supposed to be a wide-use instance.
- Comment on PieFed 1.4 is released - emoji, federated stackoverflow and AI content filters 2 days ago:
My point, in one sentence: it’s not up to the developers of a project building on ActivityPub to define policy regarding “exposure”.
As someone who actually opposed the initial implemention of Piefed’s voting being made non-public to non-instance admins (as much as possible) to other users, I completely disagree. Some people don’t like it and don’t want their votes to be easily accessible to the wider fediverse. The only way that can be implemented currently is by removing federation. Rimu serves that.
This is a good example of *selection bias*. You are getting *most* of your feedback from *other PieFed users*, who clearly are not aware of the implications of such implementation.
No, I’ve seen this opinion from others. It’s also a wider criticism of the viability of the fediverse long-term in that communities are only as long as their hosted instance. This does a lot to mitigate that.
Yes, I am opposed to any functionality being added to the server when it can be solved at the client. Content discovered can be done by the client and using a separate service like Fediverser, fedidb, or anything else. It makes no sense to have this built-in into the ActivityPub server. It is one of the many examples where the piefed devs are adding a feature because they can without thinking whether they should.
Can you tell me exactly what harm this does to the mythical ActivityPub, beyond an instance owner toggling it on in ignorance to their own detriment.
- Comment on PieFed 1.4 is released - emoji, federated stackoverflow and AI content filters 2 days ago:
No, it was not dropped. “do not federate votes” is not a privacy guarantee. It just reduces the exposure of the information from the whole Internet to the server admin. People still need to trust the admin.
Well, sure. But it’s still less of an ‘exposure’ so to speak, than a vote federating out.
If you are one of the developers of the project, you should be quibbling about the implementation. “It is popular” is not a good enough reason to effectively fabricate information.
People don’t see it as fabrication if the community movement is reflected in the public logs - which it would be. I think I’ve only seen one other person object to the mechanic of community migration on the basis of “fabricating” information, other than you. You are in a vast minority. Most people are keen to see it go further and move subscribers too, from what I can tell. The end-game is a situation where most people recognise that communities on the fediverse are functionally modular and can be moved if necessary. Most people would understand, if this was the norm, that communities are modular and can be movied in certain circumstances.
What I am against is this constant release of poorly thought out features and the prioritization of “easy” vs “correct”.
That’s not what I asked you. I said the lemmy-federate functions should instead be opt-in, and you still seemed to oppose it.
- Comment on PieFed 1.4 is released - emoji, federated stackoverflow and AI content filters 2 days ago:
Maximum anonymity is a lie. Users still need to trust the server
admin. The truth is that the Fediverse is not a secure/private
messaging platform, and attempts to hide this from the users might be well-intentioned but will bite the devs in the ass, sooner or later.Sure. Pseudonymity. Again, it was dropped.
To solve this it would be better to have the PieFed team pushing/implementing the appropriate FEPs (FEP-7952 and FEP-EF61) instead of an-hoc hack.
I’m not here to quibble about the mechanics of the implementation, but purely noting that it is popular. You seem to be opposed to it on principle.
Doesn’t matter. Admins will see it, think “that is nice!”, turn it on and only realize later that their database is completely bloated with data that is not really needed. Meanwhile, the real problem of content discovery could be solved by implementing pull-based federation and client-side caching, but again this type of work is not being done because it’s not something that the users see directly.
Then attach with it an explanation that it could cause data bloat and increase costs for them. You’re against admins having the ability to turn this on if they want?
- Comment on PieFed 1.4 is released - emoji, federated stackoverflow and AI content filters 2 days ago:
Sending pseudonymous actor ids to hide votes
This has long been scrapped. You can choose to not federate out your own downvotes now for maximum anonymity, but this was widely disliked so it was dropped.
“Migrating” communities by re-creating activities and objects on their own server, just rewriting the URLs and pretending the piefed server actually was the original source.
Yup. Although this isn’t complete in many cases, but is an entirely transparent process. I’ve told you this has vast fediverse support because it enables community modularity, which is needed in a world where instances will go offline, causing communities to be orphaned.
Integrating functionality that is hardcoded to specific instances/groups (auto-posting new communities on !newcommunities@lemmy.world)
This was agreed with the moderators of said community.
Integrating lemmy-federate directly into the instance - which is a horrendous idea if you consider that will lead to every piefed instance holding every copy of the messages, even if no one in the instance actually follows or interacts with it.
I’m not quite sure how this specifically functions for new instances, but I have suggested this be opt-in rather than opt-out.
- Comment on Does Lemmy need a fork or a rewrite due to its maintainers views? 1 week ago:
Yes I know, but I was just speaking generally.
- Comment on Does Lemmy need a fork or a rewrite due to its maintainers views? 1 week ago:
Did the OP say they can’t have those opinions?
- Comment on Does Lemmy need a fork or a rewrite due to its maintainers views? 1 week ago:
Piefed already exists (although I contest the use of “reactionary” here)
- Comment on PieFed 1.4 is released - emoji, federated stackoverflow and AI content filters 2 weeks ago:
Yeah, but if I recall you specifically - in the past (activitypub issues aside) - took specific issue with the concept of moving a user’s posts to another instance via hypothetical community migration.
- Comment on PieFed 1.4 is released - emoji, federated stackoverflow and AI content filters 2 weeks ago:
Yes, there are some people against it. But the majority of the fediverse support the idea of modular communities.
- Comment on PieFed 1.4 is released - emoji, federated stackoverflow and AI content filters 2 weeks ago:
What ad hoc activities?
And community migration being fully realised has massive fediverse support.
- Comment on PieFed 1.4 is released - emoji, federated stackoverflow and AI content filters 2 weeks ago:
Piefed is an entirely different software. You would have to sign up to a piefed instance.
- Comment on Bad content - Comics, memes, and art from the Bad website 2 weeks ago:
Legit question, how come you didn’t make the French version on jlai.lu?
- Comment on Is it really worth starting a lemmy community? 2 weeks ago:
Yes, each new communities needs to be manually added to each instance and subscribed to by a local user. Lemmy-federate is a service that instances sign up to to federate all new communities added there across the fediverse. Most instances are on it.
- Comment on Is it really worth starting a lemmy community? 2 weeks ago:
Oh, you just made it. Make sure you federate it on lemmy.federate.com.
- Comment on Is it really worth starting a lemmy community? 2 weeks ago:
What community are you thinking of making?
- Comment on Disengage, Disconnect, Block, Filter 3 weeks ago:
Piefed has a built in anti-delete function. A new account that spams posts, then deletes will get their posts automatically removed.
- Comment on Why do .ml users get a bad rep? 4 weeks ago:
The thing that is funny about Piefed vs. Lemmy is the level of authoritarian control the admin has over what you see and whether votes count or not. Specifically, they can open each instance connected with them and add a vote weight to the instance. So if they didn’t like ML, instead of blocking the instance, you can set the weight to 0, and then those users would have no idea that their votes do not contribute to a rank at all.
Are any Piefed instances doing any of this right now?
You can take an individual user and set their account to ban comments, ban posts, or both, which effectively shadow bans a user. If they’re remote, the comments, or posts never arrive at the piefed instance. None of this is visible to the end user, by the way, no alerts that this is happening to your account.
I’m not aware of this.
You can be kicked from a community by moderators, an action that you will not even know is happening to you.
When you say “moderators” do you mean admins here or community moderators?
The Admin of a piefed instance can shape the feed silently, and without users even knowing it is happening, through the use of vote weights. Which is a pretty nasty feature if I’m being honest. One of the things people assumed was happening on Reddit was that the feed wasn’t an honest representation of user activity, that the feed itself was ideologically bias (one way or the other), and yet piefed explicitly gives you those tools.
I can see a valid use-case for smaller instances that might want to elevate their own communities within their own local feeds. I think it would be pretty poor if any larger instance used this tool, but I am sure that all of these toggles can display publicly - so users on an instance would know if their experience is being gamed or curated by the admins of a local instance.
- Comment on The Grind & Bind Art Alchemist's Guild 4 weeks ago:
No, I just missed it. My bad.
- Comment on As of December 10th, You need to be sixteen to use Aussie.Zone 4 weeks ago:
Comments on reddit are suggesting that the fediverse is simply too small to come under this law btw
Also, how is the verification process working there rn?
- Comment on As of December 10th, You need to be sixteen to use Aussie.Zone 4 weeks ago:
What that means technically is that the Fediverse could just allow non-account posting whilst verifying everyone who makes accounts. What a laughable law. At least in the UK, they didn’t allow such a loophole even if we can’t do anything to 4chan.
- Comment on The Grind & Bind Art Alchemist's Guild 4 weeks ago:
!art_alchemist_guild@lemmy.today
- Comment on As of December 10th, You need to be sixteen to use Aussie.Zone 4 weeks ago:
They could probably just geoblock 4chan I guess? Maybe? Or try to? I don’t know what the government think they’re going to do. But Mississippi residents did get geoblocked from Bsky.
Well yeah, literally all they could do is geoblock 4chan.
Edit: Ok, so they ‘have no plan to ban VPNs’, but ‘are looking very closely into their usage’. I have no idea what that means.
I am a Brit.
Absolutely nothing lol.
- Comment on As of December 10th, You need to be sixteen to use Aussie.Zone 4 weeks ago:
That’s fine, but it’s an obvious technicality isn’t it?
“Oh your side has outrageous content that could harm children? Oh, it’s okay. You don’t have user accounts. Carry on.”