hawkwind @ hawkwind @lemmy.management

💩 🫘

---

Read more

Posts

3

Comments

103

Joined

2 yr. ago

F

I didn't mean YOU are being a dick. If SOMEONE creates “alt” accounts for the sole purpose of vote manipulation, they're being a dick. I was using the royal "you," a weird english language thing. You, yourself, are not a dick. We'll you might be, but I don't think so.

LLM bots has make this approach much less effective though. I can just leave my bots for a few months or a year to get reputation, automate them in a way that they are completely indistinguishable from a natural looking 200 users, making my opinion carry 200x the weight. Mostly for free. A person with money could do so much more.

Your right. You just asked what a "fake account" was though. I think it's generally accepted that if you create "alt" accounts for the sole purpose of vote manipulation, you're being a dick.

• Should we/let's defederate with X?

People can defederate from an instance for any reason they want, but if I get what you're trying to say: you think people should defederate from any instance that has a user that subscribes to all of their communities.

I just mean that the karma system ala Reddit did more than just keep track of it and display it afaik. The data is in the db but a fully done karma system it is not. I could be wrong.

And it’s only a matter of time until that detection can be evaded. The knife cuts both ways. Automation and the availability of internet resources makes this back and forth inevitable and unending. The devs, instance admins and users that coalesce to make the “Lemmy” have to be dedicated to that. Everyone else will just kind of fade away as edge cases or slow death.

The data to build it is there. Ftfy

Agree. Farming karma is nothing compared to making a single individual polar-opinion APPEAR as though it is other’s (or most’s) polar-opinion. We know that other’s opinions are not our own, but they do influence our opinions. It’s pretty important that either 1) like numbers mean nothing, in which case hot/active/etc. are meaningless or 2) we work together to ensure trust in like numbers.

In this context it would be an account with the sole purpose of boosting the visible popularity of a post or comment.

IMO, likes need to be handled with supreme prejudice by the Lemmy software. A lot of thought needs to go into this. There are so many cases where the software could reject a likely fake like that would have near zero chance of rejecting valid likes. Putting this policing on instance admins is a recipe for failure.

Come on, they’re just people too with common people problems. Cut them some slack.

You guys got potato chips?

It’s closer to reality but the thought experiment sucks because anyone can see there’s virtually zero chance of completing a single round. :(

I actually wrote it with the flip side of your centralization argument in mind. If a community exists outside of the popular ones a user may never even know of its existence. Having more show up SHOULD be better to prevent centralization no? It requires the users to change their browsing behaviour but at least they don’t have gonsearching offsite.

$14.80

The weird rage people have about this. I'm not sure where it comes from. If there are 100 communities, only the top 1-5 will contribute 90% of the content. If you have even one user subscribed to the top 20 or 50 communities, you are already likely getting 90%+ of this traffic. After subscribing to literally every community in the lemmyverse, I promise your instance will not see any meaningful increase. I'm willing to be proven wrong, but not one of the ragers has offered a credible reason other than fears based on misunderstanding. No offense.

So just refreshing the page one time after login fixes it? It could be something to be fixed in the code, but there might be a way to fix it with a browser-side script in the meantime.

It increases load during execution. Afterward it’s not significant. My instance is heavily instrumented and monitored. The load this incurs subscribing to 24000 communities is less than adding a single, moderately active user to your instance.

It’s a huge miss if the intended design was to silo information.

What this provides, as far as I’m concerned, is essential to prevent centralization to a few instances.

Is there a better way to do it inherently in Lemmy itself? Probably, and I am excited to help with that!