much of those funds go into the moderation and instance maintenance costs of the “highly controversial” Lemmy.ml,
That's not true at all, the maintenance costs of lemmy.ml's are miniscule compared to what the devs get.
However, that delves into a whole other can of worms on how PieFed instance blocks have problems - namely that people on the receiving end can still reply to them, though only people on the same originating instance will see those replies (or perhaps it’s worse and everyone using Lemmy will see them while everyone using PieFed will not? or perhaps something else altogether?).
As I understand it, keeping in mind it's been a bit since I looked at it, it depends on where the community the interaction is taking place in is hosted. That's always the central truth and where other instance collect the votes, comments etc. from. So say piefed user Alice blocks a user Bob who is on a different instance, or the instance Bob is on altogether.
If Bob then replies to Alice in a community hosted on lemmy then the reply is accepted and federated out to everyone. Alice's instances notes that she blocked Bob and drops the replies, no one on Alice's instance can see them.
If Bob replies to Alice in a community hosted on Alice's instance then Bob's instance logs the reply, sends it to Alice's instance where it gets discovered that Alice blocked Bob and the reply is silently dropped. Any instance now checking the community for new comments will not receive Bob's reply since Alice's instance dropped it. Bob's instance however already logged the reply, so it remains local to Bob's instance only.
What I don't know is what happens among piefed instances, I think there is some functionality to notify Bob's instance that Alice blocked him if Bob's instance is running Piefed and it will delete the comment, but that part I'm least sure about.
The way blocks work in Lemmy is that a user will simply not be shown what they block, federation is completely unaffected. An ordinary user can only decide what they are shown not what others are shown.
Actually it was mostly hexbear to initiate defederations. Hexbear has an allowlist of federated communities instead of a denylist and which is why it doesn't show up in the graph. The only instance to initiate defederation that I'm aware of is lemmy.world's "pre-emptive defederation as a last resort".
You can take your devs vult and shove it where the sun don't shine. You've shamelessly even named yourself after a colonizer that basically started the british mandate of palestine. Your kind has done unspeakable things in west asia and you will be remembered by history as people that were rotten to the core. Future generations will be baffled as to how humans could come to the stuff that your kind did.
Oh that's good to hear. It sucks that people have to constantly fight the dev to keep his opinions out of the code though, must be tiring for all involved surely...
The two main lists that are implemented by default are a defederation list and huge huge listof blocked domains which includes wikileaks for instance, there are other lists (I don't know if the "trusted instance" list comes prepopulated) and almost all can be emptied or added to. But that means that an admin that sets up the software has to go through a whole rigmarole to get the instance to neutral before being able to do what they think is best. And hope they didn't miss anything.
In the case of the blocked domains it's particularly grating since it has like 4000 entries that you either have to delete one-by-one or have to do a manual db transaction to empty the list and that is by design. Plus all you get as a warning that such a list exists is one line during the setup that says Added 'No-QAnon' blocklist, see https://github.com/rimu/no-qanon but it's definitely not just QAnon links.
But then the admin isn't managing the list the dev is! You have one guy managing a list across multiple instances, that circumvents the public modlog, where users do not know how they got on, or how they could get off, and the power to shadowban across multiple instances is concentrated in the hands of just one guy!
Huh?? It's not up to the admin, that's my point, the list is implemented by the dev and every instance that ran tesseract ran the same blocklist. My point is that it should be up to the admins of an instance, not the dev of software that gets deployed on multiple instances...
And every user that uses that software for whatever reason, superior features, easier on the eyes, more popular it's what everyone recommended will get their curation from that one dev.
The issue is that it's one person shadowbanning people without their knowledge for any arbitrary reason across instances. Like even if it's opt-out, that's still problematic since it makes the default experience whatever that one person thinks it should be. Why should one guy get to decide across the entire fediverse whether your posts are opt-in? That is antithetical to the very concept of the fediverse.
Refactored their existing “enable toxicity mode” feature into a clearer, toggleable blocklist feature
No! The whole point of the fediverse is not to have centralised blocklists. Having blocklists baked in to the code, especially ones that get updated in a centralised manner with no accountability and without telling users they're on it is absolutely antithetical to the platform and one of the main reasons why people are leaving reddit and coming here. If you want to curate the experience of a user in that manner, what you do is open an instance and advertise it as such. That way people can, at least on lemmy, know where they're banned from without having to dive into the code or pull API endpoints manually. In fact how a lemmy instance federates and how it curates this experience is one of the distinguishing features among the instances. You have instances like lemmy.zip that federate all that will have them, instances like hexbear that are very quick to defederate in order to keep a safe-space and instances like blahaj that are somewhere between.
A front-end (or any piece of code that is made for being deployed on multiple instances) should be agnostic to all of this. It's up to the admins of the instances and not the devs to curate and this is one of the main reasons why I don't trust the piefed dev. Sure you can disable almost everything, but that still means that an admin has to do work in order to get to a neutral place from where they can then curate.
I tried to carve out a space where those people and other rougher edges were not drowning out niche communities and hobbies and where people who choose to use the platform to harass others were also out of sight, out of mind. Apparently only three people who aren’t me actually want a place that’s not just a circle-jerk of rage and hate. Thus sayeth the mob.
100% that dude was running an op. If you want to "carve out" such a space, that would be an instance for the "non-crazies" where all "those people and other rougher edges were not drowning out niche communities and hobbies" were banned or filtered out. You can block and filter however you want on your instance. In fact that is one of the expectation one has of an instance and how one chooses an instance. I chose blahaj because of how the admins, you know, administrate and curate the instance. Writing a front-end and smuggling in a blocklist via other commits (no commit message ever acknowledged the blocklist as it was being built afaik) and having a central point of truth for what and who gets filtered is not how you "carve out" a space, it's how you try to shape discourse on an entire platform.
That DDOS attempt is him being extremely mad at db0 for thwarting this before his front-end became the de-facto standard for power-users, especially mods and admins.
.world was on the precipice of doing the right thing and disaccociating themselves from that psychotic shit show, but silently dropped the issue and carried on as usual after wringing their hands for maybe two weeks.
Oh yeah they just silently dropped it, they still owe db0 an apology for throwing all this shit at them right immediately after the nazi allegation got debunked.
I’m one person and have held my fucking ground, mostly with dignity and grace, in the heat of my own shitstorm of trying to disaccociate from the extremist elements of the fediverse.
You already had ragequit the fediverse last year remember? This is just lolcow behavior at this point.
P.S. Rimu, you owe me a beer. No one is talking about the Piefed vote quotas anymore, so you’re welcome.
I sometimes do wonder what goes on in the matrix rooms around the fediverse lol. Seems like someone fell out of favor with even the most liberal of the anti-tankies.
Yeah alongside reactiongifs and memes rimu hates how everything on the activitypub protocol is public, especially voting. Which is why he hates lemvotes...
Ok but why do you think its bad to abuse these animals aside from killing them? That's the part I'm curious about. What kind of pain would you consider immoral? Do you count emotional pain such as separating a newborn child from it's mother for instance?
There alternatives are still harm reduction, I agree that linkrot is a real issue and that animal testing is rather neglected by most vegans. However the fact that there are alternatives to the way we do animal testing, that quite a few are due to regulatory restrictions and not necessary in the scientific sense is not false information.
I would also like to point out that this expectation of always having a well-studied understanding with sources at the ready seems to not be applied when carnists post stuff like "animal testing is necessary", "animal ag's impact on the climate is negligible" etc.
.