This means that all content from communities which are hosted there is hidden. Posts from users of blocked instances are still visible in other places.
Cool! Although it’s not quite what I imagined. It’s widespread problematic posts and comments from users on instances I’d want to block in other communities I do follow which I was thinking of, and those wouldn’t be affected? I have not seen a whole lot of it so far, but I saw enough to think about it a little.
It might be more complicated, as I suppose you’d have to hide all the replies to comments from user-blocked instances as well. Maybe it could be done client-side? Seems like giving users that option would mean less motivation for defederating.
I’m all for every admin deciding what’s best to de-federate from their server, but I really dislike that people are trying to influence other servers through shaming them for not de federating from the same servers as them.
That’s the whole point of the fediverse so that I can decide myself who I want to engage with and who not, if every server has de federated from the same list of other servers what’s the point of the fediverse?
Differences in instance-level topical focus and moderation philosophy, for one. Also physical location and “vibe”.
There are a certain set of bigoted and/or extremist instances that I would judge an instance for not defederating from. There’s a reason I’ve stuck with .world even through some turbulence. Some heinous shit shouldn’t be tolerated by anyone.
This seems like an excellent use of federated services. Now their citizens have a single source for government updates that they know is valid and the government can ensure that everything follows whatever data laws they pass.
At least in Norway it was recently a huge scandal when tweets went private, as several public organs communicate through Twitter and suddenly over night this wasn't available to people.
I think there are a lot more countries than the Netherlands currently looking into this.
The Nordic Council of Ministers set up a Think Tank for digital strategy stuff last year, and they published their recommendations two months ago. They specifically advised all the Nordic governments to go all in on ActivityPub.
It would be amazing if the reason it is taking so long is that they are working on a tailor made activitypub service specifically for public information announcements. One can dream.
Not just data access or privacy, but also data retention laws for public officials. While one can hope no nation is afflicted with a leader like Donald Trump, a government-run Mastodon server wouldn't have problems like this.
It was the third time. Rutte I, III, and IV all fell, but Rutte II served its entire term (though there were still some interim changes in its composition due to a few resignations of individual ministers).
Your article is a pretty reasonable and fair evaluation of farcaster, but then your post saying crypto/web3 is “mostly really dumb and bad” is not very nuanced. I know a lot of people on Lemmy don’t like crypto, and that’s what’s in the meta right now, but if you are going to give something a fair shake, give it a fair shake, don’t just anticipate backlash for covering a crypto topic and preface it with “it’s mostly really dumb and bad”. Ya there are a lot of scams, and a lot of bullshit projects, but there is a core of really useful infrastructure there, which farcaster is using for self sovereign account registration/ownership.
I understand, don’t get me wrong, 99% of stuff in crypto is hot garbage, but having a global database that isn’t controlled by any one (or even dozen) entities is pretty powerful. The 2 guys that started farcaster could quit, or get hit by a bus, or decide it’s not profitable enough and pivot, but at least you have control over your profile still. If reddit was decentralized more, they wouldn’t be able to shut down their APIs for 3rd party clients.
Trust me I understand the criticism of block chains, but if we want open source and the internet to thrive and not be controlled by companies, we need a global layer that is neutral.
Trust, consensus, and access control are session-layer issues that don’t need to be solved by a transport-layer protocol. Social networks deserve to be able to forget things.
Which is a whole lot of extra engineering that is already taken care of with a blockchain. Whether social networks should forget your username/registration is a different debate.
It really isn’t a different debate when you’re talking about putting them on the blockchain, and all that other engineering has already been done by other distributed social networks.
Ok, we are talking in circles, you have your opinions, I have mine. If you want to talk about this over voice at any point, let me know, I don’t think text is going to get anywhere, and Lemmy has a pretty strong bias against crypto (which I understand, but obviously disagree with)
Mastodon also announced the five board members for the U.S. non-profit, of which two has led to some critical comments within the larger fediverse community: Twitter co-founder Biz Stone and legal advisor Amir Ghavi. Ghavi is involved in Blockchain and AI Technologies, technologies that the fediverse community is critical of, and Mastodon CEO Eugen Rochko himself is also has spoken out against. Both Ghavi and Stone are involved in the space of venture capital, which also has drawn criticism within the community, as they feel that it goes against the values of the fediverse.
A bit uneasy? This is beyond parody LMAO. Twitter co-founder? This is so incestuous. Open source projects are too often just a cargo cult built around corporate practices. Nothing surprising, but really validates the move to defederate with people who don’t block Threads etc.
> The ability to opt-out of quote posts is also currently planned, which makes it that Mastodon’s implementation will not be compatible with other fediverse implementations of quote posting.
Not surprising. Even before ActivityPub was announced, when the #fediverse was still powered by #OStatus, Mastodon was already breaking compatibility. There were countless of heated debates about almost every Mastodon-only "feature" they implemented that all other Fediverse devs were forced to implement.
And here we are with yet another.
I wonder what will supporters of opt-out or anti-quotepost camp will do if the other Fediverse devs ignore this Mastodon-only "feature", and just continue with the common implementation of quote posts? Are we going to see a new reason for "fediblock", and finally fragment the Fediverse network?
To add, #Fediverse devs should agree and make a stand not to implement any mainline Mastodon-only "feature" related to quote post.
If mainline Mastodon instances and users complain about it, they can just rely on "fediblock" and use this reason: "refused to implement Mastodon-only quote post feature". Sure it will fragment the Fediverse network, but why not? People and the media keeps calling it the "Mastodon network" anyway.
Users who prefer the Fediverse network over the mainline Mastodon network can migrate over to friendlier and sane instances. 😉
Not only are they federating with each other, but they implemented Group to Group following to help prevent duplicate posts. Its a feature that's been requested for lemmy/kbin/mbin, so it'll be interesting to see how well it works for them.
Thanks! And yeah, last few weeks have gotten wayy busier with news, its quite noticeable to me. I’m especially excited that there is lots of news outside of the microblogging sphere as well, that part is the most interesting part of the fediverse to me
(mentions to my indieweb account are still broken for some reason, no idea why haha)
fediversereport.com
Hot