this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2024
196 points (89.8% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35808 readers
1633 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I've seen around 3 occasions of that this week, altho I have never seen anything like it before.

if I remember correctly they were:

  • smack talking a mod (FlyingSquid) for saying not to report the same comment twice, when they were different comments, and the report was spam
  • someone comparing .world with .ml in politics (as in there was a comment saying "this post will be overrun with .ml people, and then a comment going "but you are from .world") (Maybe Im part of the problem? I have been called out for being a fascist because I questioned the "puching nazis" theme)
  • one more which I can't remember.

Anyways, what is all that about? Are people really starting to hate on 50% of the lemmy population because of their instance?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] OpenStars@discuss.online 14 points 1 month ago (3 children)

People are doing that here though - e.g. the user Blaze made accounts on basically every instance, and subscribed to every community. This gets around the limitation where at least one user of an instance must subscribe to a community before it will even so much as show up for others to also subscribe. Really the developers should have made better automation so that this was not necessary, but... anyway it works, for now:-).

[–] Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

(If true) that's actually really terrible for federation performance, particularly because lemmy doesn't do batch synchronization. So basically every comment, post, like, and community is being sent to all Lemmy servers as individual sequential requests. That's a lot to handle.

[–] OpenStars@discuss.online 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Supposedly that will change with v0.19.6 (A recent discussion about that here: https://feddit.org/post/3524876), but yeah it's causing smaller instances such as Aussie.Zone to have delays of over 7 days.

I also expressed disbelief that this info would not be bundled somehow - at least put together a package for everything that happened across the entire instance in one second, or one minute could be far better, for servers that can't handle the per-second traffic?

[–] Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Well that's good!

And right, I had the exact same thought... It seems like the lemmy devs are not highly experienced web developers, at least not that have worked on anything at the scale lemmy became after the Reddit exodus.

[–] OpenStars@discuss.online 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I thought at first that everything was simply slow to develop bc of using the Rust programming language.

Now I hold great excitement for the upcoming projects like Sublinks, Piefed, Mbin, and Tesseract (that one is more a front-end UI for whatever backend protocol). But Lemmy still has all the effort put into it in the past so it is ahead for that reason at least.

[–] Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm eyeing Piefed and Sublinks. I've done a lot with Python and Java... Maybe at some point I'll find the time to contribute more than the bit of PR review I've done for Sublinks.

I'm also watching mastodon, particularly because they're working on groups... And I don't mind the Twitter style, I've just come to prefer following topics over people... And hashtags just get flooded with low effort crap.

[–] OpenStars@discuss.online 0 points 1 month ago

Yup.

People being able to contribute more readily should really help the development move along faster, methinks, even though it is starting from behind and needs to play catch-up for awhile.

[–] can@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)
[–] OpenStars@discuss.online 1 points 1 month ago

That's nice! ☺️

[–] lvxferre@mander.xyz 1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I feel like ActivityPub implemented federation in a really weird way, and that's what causes problems like @linearchaos@lemmy.world is reporting, or the issue that Blaze is addressing through multi-accounting. Perhaps we shouldn't be sharing content across instances but only credentials.

For example. If you're registered to instance A, and B federates with A, then B would let you post from your A account as if you were registered to B. Then let the retrieval of the content of different instances up to the front-end, instead of mirroring it.

[–] OpenStars@discuss.online 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

No, the whole point for the federation is to share the content. For one, it allows redundancy so that if a rogue mod or admin decided to delete a bunch of stuff, then every other instance still retains copies of what came from it.

But that said, having to keep everything up to the second, in batches of a single action, is extremely limiting. If I downvote someone with an accidental button press, then undownvote them, then upvote - that could have been just one net interaction to send, but instead it is three.

[–] lvxferre@mander.xyz 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Redundancy is better handled through specialised mirrors, similar in spirit to reveddit. That would be even more transparent than the current system - as the mirrors could translate actions like content removal into content highlighting, so it would stick out like a sore thumb*. This would also throw the burden associated with redundancy (transmission, storage, removal of clearly illegal content) into a few machines, instead of the whole network.

I'm aware that it's a weaker form of federation than the current one but, as long as the front-end handles simultaneous multi-account and merges the feeds of the instances that you're registered to, it's already addressing the main needs:

  • users can see content from multiple places without registering individually to each
  • users don't need to see what they don't want to
  • content is still spread out, so no instance controls the whole
  • admins still have control over who accesses their own instance (through defederation + banning).

*currently you can only find a piece of removed content if you know that it exists.

[–] OpenStars@discuss.online 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

At a wild guess, it could literally be the communism?

No really, I'm serious: what you are describing sounds to me like there is a sense of "ownership", as in an instance owns a community, whereupon everything else is lesser than the owner with respect to that particular content - e.g. the others "mirror" the content that is "owned" by the instance that the community is on. A master/slave relationship, in computer science terminology.

In contrast, ActivityPub sounds to me (caveat: I've never read the source) like everyone is equal, hence why every action is shared equally by all. A distributed burden. Except without the major traditional benefits of it being distributed - i.e. Aussie.Zone cannot simply connect to some other server instance with less physical distance between it and Lemmy.World, no it must go straight to the source, even when that results in a 7-day delay (and even that cutoff is only because things older than that simply get deleted).

On the other hand, there's nothing stopping someone from not respecting the deletion requests, and instead highlighting that content, in the current Lemmy framework. It would definitely be a deviation from the standard codebase though. And therefore every time there's an update or patch, there would have to be a merge event to keep that feature functional.

I wonder if the reason your idea is not done is bc it relies too much on "trusting" the client for security reasons? Although... tbf I'm not certain how much that would differ from how things are now.

[–] lvxferre@mander.xyz 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm not sure if the analogy with communism holds well, as communism implies post-scarcity. Perhaps socialism - if you see the current AP protocol as the Soviet economy from 1918 to 22, my proposal is basically a Lenin style New Economic Policy: a step back (less federation) to take two steps forward later (federation growth).

As for the mirrors, secondary (as in backup) would be a good analogy; their main reason to exist would be to make admins+mods accountable. ("Why did you remove [content]? It's within the rules, even if you disagree with it!"). And ideally it should be possible for a single mirror to work for multiple instances, specially smaller ones. In the meantime, the actual (non-mirror) instances would be on equal grounds.

In contrast, ActivityPub [...]

As far as I know, as someone who didn't read the source either, that's accurate. aussie.zone is basically mirroring the content of federated instances, to service its users, then when some aussie.zone user posts something there the other instances mirror it.

On the other hand, there’s nothing stopping someone from not respecting the deletion requests, and instead highlighting that content, in the current Lemmy framework. It would definitely be a deviation from the standard codebase though. And therefore every time there’s an update or patch, there would have to be a merge event to keep that feature functional.

In theory, there isn't. In practice:

  • AFAIK this is not something that Lemmy or Mastodon were coded for. It's unsupported so the person doing it would need to maintain their own fork of the relevant software.
  • This becomes specially problematic once users from the non-deleting instance interact with content that, for other instances, has been deleted.

I wonder if the reason your idea is not done is bc it relies too much on “trusting” the client for security reasons? Although… tbf I’m not certain how much that would differ from how things are now.

If I had to take a guess, the reason why W3C, Lemmer-Webber and Prodromou created the AP the current way is because, while you're raising a baby, you never know the growing pains that it'll have as a teen.

[–] OpenStars@discuss.online 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Awwww, we're growing up!?:-) So even if the Fediverse eventually (in let's say a decade or two hence) becomes merely an example of what not to do, still we are in on the ground floor as we all go through these growing pains, together:-).

And we must be doing something right. Or perhaps it's that there merely aren't any other good options. But this is where the people who are good to talk with are, currently. Like you:-D.

[–] lvxferre@mander.xyz 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yup, we are growing. It isn't just in number of users, or their activity here, but also in the number of platforms using the protocol - and that's one of the things that the ActivityPub developers did really right: they picked the concept of federation from earlier protocols/standards (like OStatus), and made it usable for more than just microblogging. The impact of that is twofold:

  • future-proofing the protocol. Even if microblogging were to fade away, as a trend, the protocol would still survive.
  • older platforms push new ones up, even if the new ones are something completely novel.

(I also like chatting with you!)

[–] OpenStars@discuss.online 1 points 1 month ago

That's a good perspective. Mbin, Piefed, and Sublinks are all now implementing the ActivityPub protocol as well as Lemmy, meaning that even if "Lemmy" were to go away or fall behind or sth, the Fediverse overall would remain (as you said, and I am agreeing:-).

And entire new categories of things too - like I think that something as central as wikipedia shouldn't be federated (Russia, China, and North Korea would all have their "set of facts", separately from what the Western world uses, and e.g. Taiwan would be banned from using the latter and thereby forced to use the former, etc.), but for more niche concepts like individual video games or movie fandoms that's a great idea, so that just one single point of failure does not cause loss of all content.:-)

(and unfortunately as we see with the Internet Archive getting attacked recently, that aspect is revealed to be of greater importance than I think most people give it credit for - it's not easy to keep something up-to-date, particularly with "recent" edits, and ActivityPub as we see does so upon literally every single change, whether you wanted it to or not!?:-P)

[–] Blaze@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Ease discovery of federated communities has been funded: https://join-lemmy.org/news/2024-09-11_-_New_NLnet_funding_for_Lemmy

Also, thank you for the comment above

[–] lvxferre@mander.xyz 1 points 1 month ago

Ease discovery of federated communities has been funded: https://join-lemmy.org/news/2024-09-11_-_New_NLnet_funding_for_Lemmy

That's some great news! It's great to see that the issues are being ironed out.