Skip Navigation

Posts
14
Comments
113
Joined
2 yr. ago

...

Jump
  • I know that's how reddit works but this isn't reddit. We don't have to do things the same and we have a wider fediverse to integrate with, which necessitates different solutions.

    Your argument about multiple tags for a single topic seems to be the biggest benefit of managed tags, but I don't think that's even a bit deal. On other fediverse services, the same thing happens and users eventually settle on a single tag for a topic. Tags in a feed will also be truncated so not all of them will be displayed without interaction. That'll incentivize users to pick the right tag even more

  • ah, I see. That makes sense, thanks

  • I've been suggesting the use of tags to interoperate with the wider fediverse since lemmy started. The have reasons they don't like it but there seems to be some discussion moving forward on them in side channels. One of the devs asked for an RFC on a hashtag implementation and someone submitted one, though I haven't seen any feedback on it and it was not a solution I really liked.

  • I don't see why lemmy should leave out replies to top-level tagged posts. A tagged post is essentially like any top level post in lemmy. They could be displayed like any other lemmy post, with replies displayed in thread below

  • The main issue though is how do you meaningfully cross post mastodon content to lemmy? Will we be able to see the replies from mastodon users? Will we be able to reply?

    If lemmy users are happy to treat mastodon posts like any other external content, it could work well. But more than a bot would be necessary to fuse the two platforms.

    That already happens. Non-lemmy users can post to lemmy by making a normal post that @-mentions a community.

  • most of the early contributors from 2017-18. Many of them wrote blog posts about their experiences

  • mastodon wasn't stable or performant in the beginning either. It attracted users because there weren't other well known alternatives and those users were excited to build a new place where they felt comfortable. Gargron rode that excitement and enthusiasm until it didn't serve him anymore, then he shut those ppl out

  • a PR is not the place for that discussion.

    You're right, but gargron would do the same thing on an issue. He's done it before; it's how he handles disagreement.

  • I have argued for a while that the Fediverse is way behind in this area; part of this lack of tooling and reliance on user reports, but part is architectural. CSAM-scanning systems work one of two ways: hosted like PhotoDNA, or privately distributed hash databases. The former is a problem because all servers hitting PhotoDNA at once for the same images doesn't scale. The latter is a problem because widely distributed hash databases allow for crafting evasions or collisions.

    - https://hachyderm.io/@det/110769474386499134

    This is from the study's author (here's the full thread). It shows how pernicious centralization is in technology. The author is claiming the fediverse is "behind" instead of the tools behind behind in supporting decentralized services. They were developed with only centralized Silicon Valley silos in mind and now they can't keep up with a decentralized infrastructure and the authors solution is for decentralized services to centralize around these tools.

  • I've explained elsewhere why I don't think that's an actual issue for the fediverse, but my comment wasn't about Meta. It was just pointing out that the top comment in this chain from @Dee is not accurate because the fediverse doesn't have a single, cohesive view of Meta joining the fediverse.

  • That’s a single instance, not the entire fediverse. I know reading is hard sometimes.

    Which means it can't be taken to represent the fediverse, which I think is what @Feyter was trying to get across.

  • It makes sense and is possible within the protocol but its not implemented by any software I know of