Skip Navigation

Carighan Maconar

@ Carighan @lemmy.world

Posts
8
Comments
206
Joined
3 yr. ago

The strength of life to face oneself has been made manifest. The persona Carighan has appeared.

  • Removed

    Proposal to create a collective to own the topic-based Lemmy instances

    Jump

  • Ah, sorry if that wasn't clear, the entire second half was theoretical about a better way of doing this.

    A type of federation where there is no "home" for a community any more. It exists equally on all servers, so any being removed would have ~0 effect.

    I mentioned that basically because I feel that's a much better solution to the problem than shared ownership + locked registrations. Sorry if that wasn't clear, not my primary language.

  • Removed

    Proposal to create a collective to own the topic-based Lemmy instances

    Jump

  • Now it makes even less sense.

    So instead of one admin being able to take it all down we have multiple, and we also don't allow local users. But we have multiple admins, so these instances would be uniquely able to process very large numbers of users on account of having more than one admin? There's still the problem of course of how to handle someone being an admin on a technical level, and I don't see a solution to that. Could go and notarize shared ownership of a bare metal server I suppose?

    But still, what's the point? It doesn't improve anything, in fact it actively makes it worse. If you want communities to be resistant to server removal, you'd need a way to... federate the community. So that even if the original instance is gone, everyone keeps interacting with their local federated community-copy and these keep federating to each other (copy). As in, there's no original any more, but good luck keeping all of that consistent. 😅 In particular because that still doesn't solve the problem because now you got people able to either moderate each others copy (good luck with that power trip bonanza) and no central admin to remove the mods, or they cannot moderate each other, in which case good luck figured out how to block on a per-post basis depending on laws in your particular country getting the content federated over.

  • Beyond technical features: why we need to talk about the values of the Fediverse (part 1)

    Jump

  • From the "privacy nightmare" "article":

    If you have any objection at all to your posts and profile information being potentially sucked up by Meta, Google, or literally any other bad actor you can think of, do not use the fediverse. Period.

    It's on the internet. Public. Got it. It's almost as if, and hold on to your hats here, the whole point of posting on something like Mastodon or Lemmy or so is to have a public discourse, as you cannot know who will be replying anyways. It's almost as if, and this is getting wild, I know, read-access being public is intentional and explicitly part of the design.

    Sorry, but this always make me rage. It's like these people are discovering in 2024 that public access means anyone can read it, not just 2000 individual tech bloggers. It's like in 2024 they're discovering that, but aren't technicallly skilled enough to open a forum to have their closed-of discussions in.

    Sigh.

    No wonder the tech sphere is going to shits if this is the modern discourse around it. :(

    Sorry, rant over.

  • Removed

    Proposal to create a collective to own the topic-based Lemmy instances

    Jump

  • Just checked, they call it football. Like everyone with half a braincell.

  • Removed

    Proposal to create a collective to own the topic-based Lemmy instances

    Jump

  • Also, if we assume that the entire idea is to have more than one admin, then what change does that actually include?

    You now have 3-4 people that can go and randomly delete the whole server instead of 1? Do you know that right now, only 1 person has the credentials to the admin account of whatever server you're talking about?

  • Removed

    Proposal to create a collective to own the topic-based Lemmy instances

    Jump

  • The whole point of federation is to let people join communities even when they don’t have an account in the same server.

    [citation needed], because it disagrees with the "whole point" I can find

  • Removed

    Proposal to create a collective to own the topic-based Lemmy instances

    Jump

  • Why?

    That just locks communities off. Wh ich you could readily do before Lemmy, just host a forum. Discourse is a pretty damn cool software for it. Close registrations, close visibility, and allow users in on a per-user basis. That's also a lot how Tildes works, and I remember people here don't like that very much.

  • After a year of operation, Switzerland's government closes its Mastodon instance

    Jump

  • Yeah, not unlikely. Can't truly know ahead of time of course, but it feels like that would eventually happen. I wish governments in particular had jumped harder onto Mastodon, slowly moving attention there.

    But it's probably also difficult to justify, because from their perspective it's just one "someone else's solution" vs another. They'd have to first make their own twitter like fediverse software I bet.

  • After a year of operation, Switzerland's government closes its Mastodon instance

    Jump

  • No I mean it seems to work better as an alternative. Quite a few smaller companies, content creators and so on I want to see enws from are on there, so it somehow seems to work better for them. 🤷‍♀️

  • After a year of operation, Switzerland's government closes its Mastodon instance

    Jump

  • How do you mean? It's majorly US centric, and that was part of why Mastodon worked better as a Twitter-replacement here in the EU at first.

    But as always, something like Reddit or Twitter benefits from centralization, as far as user interactions go. So slowly, people drift to whatever the single largest alternative is when they leave the current status quo, and in alternative-Twitter-land, this seems to be either Threads or Bluesky, and their cases are fairly incomparable.

    Doesn't make it the perfect solution, but like always in Engineering, the perfect solution is rarely the best one.

  • After a year of operation, Switzerland's government closes its Mastodon instance

    Jump

  • Yeah it's no wonder as Bluesky seems to work better as an alternative.

  • Avoiding if-else Hell: The Functional Style

    Jump

  • Decision tables are nice. They hide the important part of the logic away out of view of another programmer trying to figure out a bug in the code.

    Very helpful! You take longer to find and fix bugs, and potentially miss a few extra ones because of stuff like this. Increased tech debt. Highly recommended! 👍

  • Avoiding if-else Hell: The Functional Style

    Jump

  • I love how this tries to sell making your code strictly worse as something positive.

    Sigh. And it's still full of ifs.

  • brotsy... you died...

    Jump

  • So sorry for your loss. :'(

    I'm living here with a very old lady whose sister has left us a bit over a year ago, and I cherish every day I got left with her, but she's also very old. Letting a pet go is always super tough, but I'm so grateful for the time I get wtih them.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • I guess personally I'd even be fine with not being asked, though now that you mention it, I'd like to at least know.

    But then again, to some extend that's how it works here. My insurance knows about everything, but I need to allow doctors to access or modify my file, and then only portions of it. Like my general doctor can do a lot of stuff, but obviously my dentist can only do dental and radiology stuff.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • I mean to a degree this makes sense. It might very much be medically required to share such data.

    How to, for example, prosecute a doctor for quackery if you cannot get access to the cases they worked on? So for oversight, someone overseeing it needs to be able to know drtaiks about the cases, too.

  • Stack Overflow Survey: 80% of developers are unhappy

    Jump

  • I mean, the thing I work on hada great idea. Use microservices, because we genuinely have a need to independently scale different parts.

    Few years down the line and there's an endless list uff services, most with a single instance doing nothing all day, and having memory and CPU overhead of course. And being a nightmare to figure out what code is whereas they all communicate independently.

  • What browser is visiting the page?

    Jump

  • Both. I use YT on Firefox constantly, and I just explicitly tried again with a swapped user agent, and there's no issues at all, works perfectly as expected. I saw from your other reply that you use a fairly involved and heavily modifying expansion, not just a user agent switcher.

    If you try to "harden" your FF, always keep in mind that a large portion of that means absolutely breaking things left and right and center. It might work, but always expect it will not. Because it's just not something anybody would ever test for when creating web pages. So you're running essentially unknown scenarios. It might be interesting input to the extension-author that this breaks, though. It might be something they think they got working. Of course, it could also be that it's "Yeah that happens, it's intentional". But might as well report it to them.

  • What browser is visiting the page?

    Jump

  • So you don't use Firefox, you mess with Firefox. That's on you then. Devs can't be held responsible for you intentionally breaking things. Only do what you know works.

  • What browser is visiting the page?

    Jump

  • It works fine?