this post was submitted on 21 Dec 2023
310 points (96.4% liked)

Fediverse

27490 readers
577 users here now

A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).

If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to [email protected]!

Rules

Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration), Search Lemmy

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I used to think that there would be 1, main 'Fediverse' with all of the 'big instances' connected to each other. The recent Threads debacle has shown me otherwise.

The point of the Fediverse is that there is no one single entity, or group of entities, dominating it all.

Right now it feels like whatever the big instances do, we kind of have to go along with to be a part of anything. As the Fediverse grows, there will be more options to suit different types of users.

I think it's fine if big instances federate with Threads and it's fine if they don't. People can just join instances that align with what they want. It's not like defederating means being cut out of the Fediverse, that's not possible.

Great design. I'm eager to see how it plays out.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 100 points 8 months ago (6 children)

The most reasonable solution I’ve seen so far, from the pixelfed and pixelfed.social creator

https://mastodon.social/@dansup/111617703110836835

[–] [email protected] 47 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Not the solution I was hoping for but it's an extremely reasonable compromise. I've never heard of selective authorized fetch. Pretty sure he just invented it.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 8 months ago

FOSS ingenuity at work. All it needs is adaptation and adoption.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Authorised fetch has been a thing on Mastodon and I believe Akkoma too. I don't know if Pleroma, Soapbox or Misskey have it though.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago

Unless I'm wrong, the unique thing here is that auth fetch is always off for the server. It's on only at the user level and it's only on at that level if a user has an active domain block.

That could actually solve a lot of problems for people. Admins are reluctant to enable it server-wide because it causes a bunch of problems. The biggest being that it breaks federation with servers running older software (Mastodon v <3.0 I think) and with other services (Pleroma, maybe others). It also uses more server resources. But there are always people who think it's worth it.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Authorized Fetch has been a thing for a bit on Mastodon at least - but as far as I can see it's a global toggle rather than saying "If you present as a domain on the blocklist then you must be authorized to fetch this resource" (the selective authorized fetch I assume they're talking about).

Never used Akkoma though, so I can't speak for it.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Yeah the selective part I think is new. I believe Akkoma's authorised fetch is similar to Mastodon, though I've also heard it came at the cost of breaking MRFs (essentially policies to handle incoming messages, that can be custom-written if needed)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 21 points 8 months ago

For the lazy:

After some careful consideration, I have decided to block threads.net on pixelfed.social and .art by default

However, users will have the ability to unblock the domain

Soon we will be selectively enforcing authorized fetch for accounts with domain blocks so as to provide the best of both worlds.

(I'm also shipping a command for :pixelfed: admins to easily add user domain blocks for all local users)

I'm eager to hear your feedback!

PR: https://github.com/pixelfed/pixelfed/pull/4834

[–] [email protected] 16 points 8 months ago

That's a good solution. Keeps the all feed clear of threads content while allowing users to opt in

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Did Dan ever get the messaging service Sup going? Tried to look it up, but his name being Dansup is throwing a wrench in my Googlefu.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Also searching for #sup in Mastodon has been a good way to find information about developments. Not so necessary now that there's an official account I guess. :)

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 30 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Yeah. And now that we have account migration we can switch more easily.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Unless you want content and more people to interact with.

Like, people keep saying "oh yeah you can jump instances" as if that wasn't possible on Reddit. You could go to different subs or make your own. But what good were most of them? As long as there's a "default", a main "hub", people will go there, and that's where everything will be happening. The alternatives and smaller instances will be starved out.

Centralization is not about the software, it's about the people. Users centralize where others are. So when the big hubs are allowing threads to poison the well, it's poisoning the thing most people want to drink from, and the thing new visitors will be most likely to drink from.

Threads represents something that a lot of people came to the fetiverse to escape. If threads wants to join, fine, but I believe it is in the best interest of all of us if there is a large alternative "cluster" that is separate from it rather than being tied up with it.

A separate galaxy in the fediverse, that says in big red neon lights, "Get your corporate bullshit away from us. This is our space, for people, not for you to make money." And if we let them in immediately, it becomes increasingly difficult for that galaxy to retain that identity.

And I'll just gently point out that once Threads joins, separating from it will not be easy because you will have Threads users here actively pushing back on the separation.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 29 points 8 months ago

Finally someone gets it!

[–] [email protected] 22 points 8 months ago (4 children)

I'm out of the loop

Last thing I vaguely remember about a defederation incident was honeybear or something like that upsetting everyone

[–] [email protected] 29 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Essentially, Facebook's Twitter competitor Threads is gearing up to join the fediverse by integrating ActivityPub into their platform. Don't take my word too much on this but I believe this is due to the European Commission's Digital Markets Act which requires interoperability (similar to how iOS now requires sideloading in the EU). This is essentially their cheap way of complying.

The fediverse has a strong hatred of Facebook, for various reasons (from petty things like "embrace, extend, extinguish" to much more serious things like Facebook's compliance in the Myanmar genocide) and a "pact" was enacted of fediverse instances that are simply outright blocking Threads. Part of it is the fear that Facebook will federate its moderation problem and cause a headache (which, in my opinion, would be better dealt with by limiting Threads to followers only - Mastodon and Pleroma allow this).

Opponents of the Fedipact are optimistic this will help a more mainstream audience warm up to the fediverse. The fediverse has a reputation of being unwieldy and complicated to newcomers, and having a major platform like Threads integrating ActivityPub might help bring them in and see what it's like. Toxicity is cited as a reason for defederating Threads, but IMO I see more toxicity towards newcomers and outsiders coming from the people already on the fediverse, so I've been quite apathetic to the Threads thing.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 8 months ago (5 children)

Yeah I'm in a wait and see with my instance. People act like it's one and done. When they start they'll be just another server to me. If they start becoming hostile and everything coming from them it's terrible then I'll defederate. Same as any other server.

People are worried about data being misused but, I'm sorry, that's what happens when we publish to an open protocol. Anyone can use it however they want, and yeah, they're are scum usage for it

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Agreed. I think Lemmy is more public than Mastodon and co. which do have some privacy settings for posts and account follows, but ActivityPub is inherently a public protocol. Appreciate everything you've done for Poptalk btw!

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (3 children)

The controversy you are referring to is regarding specifically .world defederating Hexbear "preemptively" before the latter could federate with anyone, out of fear that the "annoying tankies" may overrun everyone else. Since Hexbear is a relatively small platform run by volunteers like .world is, and the basis on which the defederation was justified was shaky at best, a lot of users raised an eyebrow. There was a similar move by .world later on where they defederated from Lemmygrad, another "tankie" instance, due to alleged hate speech of which the admins failed to provide a single example, and it was clear as day that .world admins just wanted some excuse to defederate away "the evil communists".

In this case, the situation is different, because it involves a lot more than just .world. A large, for-profit instance Threads, run by Meta, is opening up to ActivityPub, and people are afraid of the reasonable possibility that Meta is attempting to either destroy or absorb the Fediverse as a whole. Besides the shitty corporate attempts in the past, Threads is also overrun by a lot of algorithm induced hate speech and far-right extremism, and there is a legitimate concern that this will spread to instances that federate with Threads.

Hexbear (and others like Lemmygrad) are different in that they are still part of the Fediverse, they are run by volunteers like most instances, and remain federated with other large instances such as lemm.ee. But the fact that hate speech is rampant in Threads yet .world admins want to "wait and see" make the Lemmygrad defederation even clearer and funnier in retrospect, lol. I complained back in the day when Hexbear was defederated that I'd rather let users choose for themselves whether they wanted that or not, and I got told to go to another instance. Now that we are federating with Threads anyway, might as well do that.

Edit: Typos

[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (3 children)

You don’t have to look far on hexbear or lemmygrad to find people cheering on the murder of Israelis on October 7th or denying genocides like the Holodomor so I’m not sure what you’re talking about when you say neither instance is hateful. Meanwhileongrad is full of screenshots of ridiculous hateful bullshit.

Edit: I might add that they’re extremely ban happy and yet would cry when their rants were deleted or when they received bans for spamming on other instances. Blatant double standard. Shit, I’ve had comments deleted for “hate speech” from Lemmy.ml for saying that Hamas and Iran are a big part of the problem in the Middle East.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago

I feel like honeybear suits them better. They seem sweet like honey in how they support minorities and protected classes, but then they support viciously genocidal dictatorships like Russia and China

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago (4 children)

Most instance admins are federating with Threads/Meta. Even if you block the instance yourself, it doesn't prevent you from seeing Threads users' comments and the hate, harassment, and extremism on that platform from spreading throughout federated instances.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 8 months ago (3 children)

there is no one single entity, or group of entities, dominating it all.

This is what Zuck wants to change with Threads.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It's not. He wants to create a social media that exploits its users without being accused of monopolistic behaviour.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 8 months ago (1 children)

All the tasty data collection and surveillance with none of the calories.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 8 months ago (2 children)

What kind of "tasty data collection and surveillance" will Meta have access to that they didn't before federating?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (23 children)

Edit: Since so many people are misinformed: No, blocking Threads on an individual basis is not a solution. This only blocks posts from Threads showing up in your feed. It does not block Threads users' comments from spreading hate and extremism throughout federated instances, and lemmy users will still be subject to potential harassment from Threads users. (See the harassment of the LGBTQ+ community on Threads for examples...)

Here's a comment of mine that states my argument against federating with Threads.

Also, I was not trying to debate the issue here. I was looking for recommendations for alternative instances... I'd appreciate anyone actually responding to my comment.

Original comment: Anybody have recommendations on a decent instance that won't be federating with Threads? Maybe one that allows community creation but isn't full of tankies?

I'm jumping ship from .world if they go through with federating with Threads. Such a shame to see the effort put into building this great instance come undone.

This place decided to disregard what the majority of their users want and turn the neighborhood to shit way faster than reddit. I thought we'd at least have a couple years before instance admins started selling out to such a shitty company that's going to make the fediverse a less safe place for their users.

Meta will also do anything they can to EEE and I'm not convinced the fediverse is as invulnerable to such exploitation as some users seem to be.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago

I was looking for recommendations for alternative instances… I’d appreciate anyone actually responding to my comment.

OK.

Largest Lemmy instances blocking Instagram Threads are (according to fedipact.veganism.social) lemmy.ml, lemm.ee, lemmy.ca, Hexbear, feddit.de, Beehaw, Lemmygrad, lemmy.dbzer0.com, lemmy.blahaj.zone, discuss.tchncs.de, sopuli.xyz, aussie.zone, feddit.nl, lemmy.zip, midwest.social, feddit.uk, mander.xyz, ...

[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Just because Lemmy.world doesn’t agree with about defederating with meta doesn’t make them sell outs. Like you said, you are jumping ship; just like the fediverse intended.

For better or worse, Lemmy.world is intended to be a catch all instance for normies so it makes sense why they would not defederate from meta.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (4 children)

I disagree that they aren't selling out.

I consider it to be as such when this move isn't supported by most of their userbase, they misframe that blocking Threads is a viable solution for the rampant issues with hate/extremism, and the decision puts their users at risk (both in the form of extremism/harassment and exploitation by Meta).

It's an inch towards becoming mainstream, but the costs outweigh the benefits IMO. I believe it's hypocritical to defederate from exploding heads and then turn around and federate with Threads.

I think misleading users into believing they can block Threads (only the posts), making a decision against the majority of their community's wishes, and instead subjecting them to potential harassment, misinformation and exploitation is selling out.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

There are lots of hypotheticals here.

I expect the lemmy.world admins to block servers that are frequent sources of hate and extremism. I don't expect them to speculatively block servers because some people guess they might be. I'm pretty skeptical that a majority of users want preemptive blocking. I don't, and the votes and comments I see in most conversations on the subject suggest that's a position held by a very loud minority.

I'm not sure Threads users will be all that interested in interacting with Lemmy. It's an awkward UX to participate in Lemmy conversations from Mastodon, and I believe Threads has essentially the same format. Threads is likely to have a bigger impact on Mastodon servers, and I don't think any of us can reliably predict what that impact will be yet.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago

I disagree on user support. Look at the posts heavily discussing the matter, and also pay attention to the vote counts.

Also, it's not a hypothetical when there is already a systemic issue and the company has a notorious history. Look at my comment here for my fleshed out argument on this subject with citations.

I wasn't intending on debating the issue here; I was only looking for recommendations on alternative instances.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 8 months ago (6 children)

Can’t you block threads yourself once .world updates to 0.19.0?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago (2 children)

That's such a misinformative false 'solution' people keep peddling..

No, blocking Threads on the individual user level does not stop comments made by Threads users from showing up on federated instances, even for users who block Threads.

That means users who block Threads will still see hate/extremism and are still subject to potential harassment by toxic Threads users.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (19 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Same. So what if someone doesn't want to federate/defederate, but I don't think people should be hassling admins to defederate

[–] [email protected] 13 points 8 months ago

You can always, as a client, block individual instances in your settings

load more comments
view more: next ›