Kalcifer

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

TL;DR: There is no singular answer to your question, imo. Essentially just run the instance transparently, reliably, and actively, and it will be attractive to people.

I'm not sure that there is one "best way" to grow an instance. An instance is essentially the fundamental governing framework for how the users interract with each other. You structure the rules around how you believe the users on your instance should interact, and those who agree with those rules will be drawn to them. Ideally, for sustainable growth in an instance, you also need reliable server infrastructure -- the instance should be responsive, and have a reliable uptime. An instance's admins must also actively moderate content. An instance with inactive moderators is not sustainable, and will quickly delve into hosting unwanted content on the instance which is undesirable for users.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Thank you for the apology 😊 I can understand how my post could've been construed as being lazy.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

??? Why don’t you tap it and see.

I did try that. Nothing appeared to happen, or change on my end; however, I now realize what the issue was. The first thought that I had, when I first noticed that Icon, was actually the exact same as that which you said; it just never occured to me that I could be on the same instance as the comments in question. So, when I tried clicking that icon, I was clicking it on a post that was from Lemmy.world -- the same instance that I am on. As such, I noticed no change in the displayed content -- the page would appear to load, but nothing would actually change. This is, of course, to be expected -- I just didn't put 2 and 2 together. I apologize if my inquiry seemed lazy, or thoughtless.

As an aside, In my defence, the UI also doesn't necessarily tell you what the icon does. If you hover your mouse over it, you will see the following:

Imo "link" isn't exactly descriptive, as to the button's purpose.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

likely will cause issues at some point

What sort of issues?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Are you ever clearing cookies?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago

I think it's time to close some of your open tabs.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It appears that I do have the "Show context" button (granted it's a little hard to notice at first), but it appears to not be functioning properly. I just tested it in this thread by clicking "Show context" for this comment, and instead of showing me this comment, as I would expect, it instead showed me this comment.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Can you see if a moderator has removed comments from a thread?

Yes, but it involves sorting through the community modlog.

I wonder if this feature could be implemented -- it would just be another sorting option in comment sections -- assuming that the server actually stores this data.

Can you see the content of the removed comments?

No. Not even mods/admins can.

From what I can see in the modlog, it appears that you can see the content of comments, but just not the content of posts. It seems to treat comments as post titles in the log. What's also weird is that they have links associated with them which appear to point at nothing. Perhaps they are supposed to point to the original comment/post?

Are moderators able to specify motive for the specific removal?

Yes, but to be honest, I have no idea where that reason goes or who it is visible to

It looks like you can see it underneath the removed item in a little bit of text that states "Reason", and then the reasoning.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Go to filter by action and choose “removing comments”

That's only within the modlog, though. I'm talking about withint the comment thread for a post. As I stated:

Also, can you see mod removals within a comment thread? Or is it only in the modlog that you can see removals?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

You wont be able to see any reply context?

EDIT: Upon testing here, it appears not. That makes it rather unuseable, does it not?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Cool! However, while it does show the full log of removals, it appears that I can't see the original content of the post -- I can only see that a post with a title was removed. Also, can you see mod removals within a comment thread? Or is it only in the modlog that you can see removals?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

I didn't think that it would -- I was hopeful that it might.

 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/2452085

This is, of course, assuming that the instance is not hosted on the same network that the device your account is using is accessing it from.

 

This is, of course, assuming that the instance is not hosted on the same network that the device your account is using is accessing it from.

 

This is, of course, assuming that the instance is not hosted on the same network that the device your account is using is accessing it from.

 

I'm aware of Signal's "no log policy", but I'm wondering if such information is visible to the servers at all. I'm assuming "Sealed sender" is what is supposed to protect this information? If so, how effective is it?

 

EDIT (2023-07-31T22:18:52Z): I have realized that I was not clear in my original intent for this post -- it could be interepereted to mean that I am asking whether or not you could access, for example, Lemmy through the Tor browser. This is not what I meant. What I was more alluding to was if it were possible to create a sort of "hidden fediverse" that was separate from the fediverse over the clearnet. There exitsts, already, Dark Web forums, like Dread, and I wonder if those would benefit more from being federated -- Lemmy seems like a good candidate for this.

Title changes: Added "More specifically, could one make a sort of "Hidden Fediverse"?"

 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/2357075

It seems that self hosting, for oneself, a federated service, like Lemmy, would only serve to increase the traffic in the network, and not actually serve the purpose of load balancing between servers.

As far as I understand it, the way federation is supposed to work is that the servers cache all the content locally to then serve to the people that are registered to that server. In doing so, the servers only have to transmit a minimal amount of data between themselves which lowers the overhead for small servers -- this then means that a small server doesn't get overwhelmed by a ton of people requesting from it. Now, if, instead, you have everyone self hosting their own server, you go right back to having everyone sending a ton of requests to small servers, thereby overwhelming them. It seems that it's really only beneficial to the network if you have, say, hundreds of medium sized servers instead of, say, thousands, of very small servers. While there is the resilience factor, the overhead of the network would be rather overwhelming.

Perhaps one possibility of fixing this is to use some form of load balancer like IPFS to distribute the requests more evenly, but I am no where even remotely close to being knowledgeable enough in that to say anything definitively.

 

It seems that self hosting, for oneself, a federated service, like Lemmy, would only serve to increase the traffic in the network, and not actually serve the purpose of load balancing between servers.

As far as I understand it, the way federation is supposed to work is that the servers cache all the content locally to then serve to the people that are registered to that server. In doing so, the servers only have to transmit a minimal amount of data between themselves which lowers the overhead for small servers -- this then means that a small server doesn't get overwhelmed by a ton of people requesting from it. Now, if, instead, you have everyone self hosting their own server, you go right back to having everyone sending a ton of requests to small servers, thereby overwhelming them. It seems that it's really only beneficial to the network if you have, say, hundreds of medium sized servers instead of, say, thousands, of very small servers. While there is the resilience factor, the overhead of the network would be rather overwhelming.

Perhaps one possibility of fixing this is to use some form of load balancer like IPFS to distribute the requests more evenly, but I am no where even remotely close to being knowledgeable enough in that to say anything definitively.

 

The most common answer I see is something along the lines of "it's the equivalent of liking a post on twitter". It seems that this is not the case, as the Mastodon devs seem rather adamant that they don't want "likes" in Mastodon. Perhaps it's a method of saving posts? Well, that doesn't make sense either, since there is already the ability to "Bookmark" a post to save it.

It really just seems like a "Favorite" is just a bookmark that tells the poster, and the public that you bookmarked the post. And even if this was the reasoning -- which is baffling enough as it is -- it wouldn't make sense since the whole point of boosting something is to tell the public that you like a post.

It really seems like the "Favorite" button has no actual unique purpose. In my honest opinion, Mastodon should just federate "Likes" like normal, and be done with it.

 

I can't really find any information on where one would submit a feature request for KDE products -- it seems wrong, to me, to submit them to the bugtracker.

I found this Reddit thread that seems to say that there isn't one, but that post is, as of writing this, 6 years old, so I'm wondering if anything has changed since then?

 

I can't seem to find any setting to enable automatic updates in Discover. Currently, I get a ping for available updates, nearly every day, and I then have to manually click "Update". I would much prefer for Flatpaks to automatically update themselves in the same way that Gnome Software does it.

I understand the negative sentiment that many have towards automatic updates, but, for Flatpaks, it's a risk that I am completely willing to take.


Update #1:

There appears to be a setting for toggling automatic updates in System Settings>Software Update>Update software>Automatically; however, it appears to be a known bug that this is currently broken with flatpak.

 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/2264480

From my experience, it seems that any service that offers cryptocurrency payments seems to always set them up as a one time purchase that you manually must renew periodically. Is there any standard that exists, or is in the works that supports recurring payments to a service directly from a wallet?

view more: ‹ prev next ›