They also assert that Bluesky doesn’t federate (it currently doesn’t, but the protocol is designed for federation!) when it’s clear that it now does.
I’m not surprised about the skepticism there though. These are just promises, and we all know that a for-profit entity will happily sacrifice any promies if it means they make more money that way. Also depending on how exactly that federation will work it might be practically useless as well.
Man, please, learn to read. My whole point is that you should not care about what people upvote.
So once again: if you are okay with the original comment/post - which means you are fine with keeping Nazis on and what they have to say on your platform - then you should be okay with people who “react” on that content.
Or maybe you aren’t fine with it, so you should delete the offending post or comment, and then you won’t be bothered by the reactions either.
I think that if you allow that question in the first place, voting on it should not have any consequences either.
Besides, despite what most people instinctively think it’s better to see what you disagree with so that you can keep your eyes on it rather than forcing it into hiding and knowing nothing (again, in moderation - you probably don’t want to run an actual Nazi instance, so if it does bother you you should moderate that post/comment).
And mistakes still happen; it’s easy to accidentally upvote/downvote something by mistake, to misunderstand someone, etc. So yes, I do think banning people based on what they up/downvote is a bad idea.
perfect example is when a nazi says “based” in response to an article about someone being racist and it gets like 20 upvotes. I don’t think anyone reasonable would be against a banwave on something like that.
I would absolutely be against that. Voting should not be bannable outside of vote manipulation itself. If the content is offending, remove that (and possibly ban the user), but not people who vote on it. That’s just stupid “guilty by association” nonsense. And besides, voicing stupid opinions (in moderation) is still better than suppressing free speech.
Lemmy just chooses to hide them to prevent the “chilling effect” where people feel afraid to vote honesty for fear of repercussions.
I find that kinda stupid as well. It leads people to think that their votes are private when literally anyone can view them with a bit of work. Sure the chilling effect sucks but it’s better than misleading people. At the very least they should be warned when they sign up.
Good to know which company should be avoided for buying home appliances. I really hope the notice will be the first thing to show ope when you search their name + HA Integration.
Why not judge these instances on their own merit though? If what you say becomes true and is so problematic and rampant that it needs addressing, you can block that instance. But doing so preemptively seems petty and counterproductive at best.
What if there is an instance that selectively reposts from Threads only decent, thoughtful discussions?
Oh and as a side note; if you’re worried about stuff getting more mainstream, toxic and polarized that’s kinda inevitable if you want more people using the fediverse, that’s just how it is when lots of differently thinking people are in one place.
It’s even simpler than that; you probably pay for your SIM credit online / with a card, which is much easier to tie to a person than using cell towers for tracking.
At least if you break something it’s just you who you have to deal with.
Anyone knows why Mastodon is so disk space hungry? Seems kinda stupid.
Didn’t know that’s the case, that’s neat though it doesn’t solve the redirect back to your home instance.
It’ll also probably lead to centralization because if you’re more likely to find a particular instance through search and decide to join Lemmy you’re probably going to do so on that instance.
The point of random GUIDs is that there are so many that it’s effectively impossible to generate duplicates just by random chance. They’d be perfect for this.
The initial instance picks it, and then the federated instances use it.
Yes, this would be possible (and not too hard technically either). But all instances would have to agree to link this instance as canonical.
You’d also want to add a feature where you can set you home instance where this canonical instance would redirect you (perhaps even automatically). Home Assistant does something like that.
What pisses me most about Lemmy is that each instance has its own post IDs which means that crosslinking and switching instances based purely on URLs is impossible.
IMO posts should have random GUIDs for IDs; that would help a ton with these kinds of issues. It’d then be trivial for Google to detect same content (if they wish) this way
I mean it’s more accurate and unambiguous. Definitely preferable overall IMO.
But you can still deal with that respectably, or just not comment at all if you can’t do it in a representative way.
Ahh interesting. Well, that’s growing pains, and fairly minor ones I’d say. Let’s hope it’ll eventually get better.
Also thanks for explaining “subscribe pending”, I was wondering about that.
I dunno, paying less than $10 is more than enough, definitely more than you could make from ads per person. And the reality is that not many people can afford to throw $10+ on every single online service.
If anything, it might be doable if you could pay, say, $50 and distribute that between everything based on your usage. But then service providers don’t really want that either, they’d rather take all that just for themselves than share with others.
Yeah, I don’t think asking communities that are already fairly small on Reddit to create the same community on Lemmy was a good idea.
For something like this it’d be best to start with a single community for the whole broad topic (like, ImaginaryStuff). Hell, Reddit used to be a “single subreddit” originally. And the niche subreddits didn’t pop up until fairly recently where they were actually able to entice enough people to use them.
Also because the number of subscriptions that one sees is only from their instance
Huh is that actually a thing? That’s kinda dumb, but explains the tiny numbers I’ve seen a few times.
Not really; login mechanisms are a separate thing. OAuth already exists. You only need Fediverse software to accept OAuth from anywhere and to provide it to others.
The migration part is IMO harder, but not necessarily by much. I don’t know of any fediverse software that’d allow it though.
Anything that can compute can do it. The important part is that it has an associated non-insignificant cost.