Amju Wolf @ amju_wolf @pawb.social

Posts

2

Comments

366

Joined

2 yr. ago

Ah yes because the last ten times they did this it totally didn't backfire and they had everyone else's future in mind while selflessly giving up a lot of their own.

Oh wait...

Also, this isn't even compatible with copyright law in some countries. I.e here you can't give up authorship at all; you can only grant an irrevocable, perpetual license (that might even prohibit you from distribution yourself and such) but you'll always be able to say "I made this" no matter what their license says.

Regular Fedora is more than stable enough for day to day use. I'd start there and then with use see if it's a good fit.

Quite the irony; somehow not doing anything and getting people killed needlessly and destroying your own nation is an okay path forward, but trying to find a compromise that stops that would cost you your career... I mean, it's not surprising, but also really sad.

Sooo they can bend the law and postpone holding elections, but they cannot bend it to hold peace talks? It's just an excuse.

I may understand "opinionated" differently from you, but the main issue is that when you do want to change something, you can't. Or it's some unsupported hack, or (best case) you flip some hidden configuration variable (that will probably break with the next release).

KDE is well configured from the get go as well, you don't have to change anything and it will work well. But if you do decide that you don't like some of their defaults, you can tweak many aspects of it.

It wouldn't really be an issue if you didn't need an extension for every single basic functionality...

Because of how stupidly opinionated Gnome is I switched to KDE a year or so ago and have been extremely happy with it. And what do you know I don't even need any extensions, because sane stuff like tray icons are builtin.

I do use an extension for distributing windows in custom areas though, and it didn't even break throughout the (I believe) 2 large updates there were since I started using it.

That's what PieFed changes though. You can still track how someone votes, but you can't tie it to a specific profile (without doing some extra analysis and even then you can't be completely sure).

Or, with my suggestion, you could track how that specific account votes, but it would be easy to obfuscate who exactly it is and (hopefully) impossible to track to the user's other identities.

I think this approach kinda fixes that issue though, no? You can use it the way it is now, and others can be anonymous.

I mean it would be also nice if you could log into multiple accounts and easily switch between them for each vote and comment, but this is also good, IMO.

Looks like it’s kinda hard to spin up a piefed bot. Not impossible, but it’s a bitch without an API.

What you would actually want to do if you want to bot is take one of the existing apps and modify it to make spamming easy.

Either way, I want to be able to point to their behavior - without the extra step of having to de-anonymize their activity - and tell them to chill the fuck out or get the fuck out. Out means out. Totally and forever.

I can see why you would want that, but my question is is that such a big deal compared to people being harassed for their voting? I don't think user privacy should be violated - especially en masse / by default just because of some (in my opinion fairly minor) moderation concerns.

And if they are a dick overall, then you will figure it out anyway, ban their "main" account and that will prevent them from voting, too (unless the instance is malicious, but then a malicious instance can do much more harm in general).

That's technically true, but the apps "everyone" has are the opposite to that, and people are used to it and don't really seem to complain. So if Facebook, Tiktok, Twitter, Amazon, Spotify and Aliexpress each do their own (garbage) thing, it shows other brands they can do that too, and they kinda ruin it for everyone. Basically the apps you spend most time in are probably like that, and it's a shitty experience.

It's very easy to find my IRL identity, and even my online pseudonym (well, both of them) have so much stuff tied to them that they are effectively my real identities. They are very much public, and definitely not anonymous.

...to be fair browsers don't really make sense for streaming, but you could call it "future proofing".

I don't think dual boot has ever been a good solution (unless you also run one or both of the OS's under the other in a VM).

Like, if you are unsure about linux, trying it out, learning, whatever, you can just boot a live"cd", or maybe install it on an external (flash) drive.

If you are kinda sure you want to switch, just nuke Windows; it's easier to switch that way than to have everything on two systems, having to switch.

This means that it is impossible for them to make a patch or PR because it would conflict with the projects licence and fact its open source.

That's not how it works. It just means the company owns the code for all intents and purposes, which also means that if they tell you that you can release it under a FOSS license / contribute to someone else's project, you can absolutely do that (they effectively grant you the license to use "their" code that you wrote under a FOSS license somewhere else).

Mass vote manipulation should still be easy to spot. It'll only be hard to check whether the account voting is a real person.

Thanks for being so upfront about how you run your instance. I think it's disingenuous when people claim that there is "no agenda" or "no moderation" or whatever, because there is always some - even if unintended - just by the pure nature of people running it. So being explicit and opinionated about it is great.

...and it still doesn't solve the issue that literally anyone can run their own instance and just capture the data.

On one end, if it’s my instance and I want to ban a user, I want the whole fucking user banned – not just remove their ability to vote anonymously.

I mean, is that truly the case? If a user only engages in vote manipulation, but otherwise they have insightful comments/posts, is it really that big of a deal that you will ban only their option to vote?

It could be mitigated further by having a different Actor per community you engage in, but that is definitely a bigger change in how voting works currently, and might have issues detecting vote brigading.