this post was submitted on 17 Jun 2023
231 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

39548 readers
257 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

In my opinion, there are two big things holding Lemmy back right now:

  1. Lemmy needs DIDs.

    No, not dissociative identity disorder, Decentralized Identities.

    The problem is that signing up on one instance locks you to that instance. If the instance goes down, so does all of your data, history, settings, etc. Sure, you can create multiple accounts, but then it's up to you to create secure, unique passwords for each and manage syncing between them. Nobody will do this for more than two instances.

    Without this, people will be less willing to sign up for instances that they perceive "might not make it", and flock for the biggest ones, thus removing the benefits of federation.

    This is especially bad for moderators. Currently, external communities that exist locally on defederated instances cannot be moderated by the home-instance accounts. This isn't a problem of moderation tooling, but it can be (mostly*) solved by having a single identity that can be used on any instance.

    *Banning the account could create the same issue.

  2. Communities need to federate too.

    Just as instances can share their posts in one page, communities should be able to federate with other, similar communities. This would help to solve the problem of fragmentation and better unify the instances.

Obviously there are plenty of bugs and QoL features that could dramatically improve the usage of Lemmy, but these two things are critical to unification across decentralized services.

What do you think?

EDIT: There's been a lot (much more than I expected) of good discussion here, so thank you all for providing your opinions.

It was pointed out that there are github issues #1 and #2 addressing these points already, so I wanted to put that in the main post.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] utg@mander.xyz 4 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Been exploring, setting up my account, learning to use lemmy since 2am, this is the fundamental issue in facing, one that I cannot seem to wrap my head around.

I'm not sure (someone can correct me if I'm wrong) if my account is in certain instance, I can subscribe to communities in that instance, or other external instances. However, subscribing to communities in other instances is pretty tedious. I still don't know how to reliably do it on PC let alone mobile. It's a toss up for me if it'll open in my account or a new page asking me to log in to that instance.

Hopefully in the coming months lemmy can take off and we can have something amazing on our hands

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] jeena@jemmy.jeena.net 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I don't understand the first one, why would we want that? Wouldn't it be enough to make it possible to move accounts similar to how mastodon does it (but including your local content)?

My bigger problem is that if a instance goes down then the community is gone. I like how Matrix has solved it that you can have aliases and the content gets replicated on other servers, etc. Then even if people defederate then you still have your old copy and people can keep using it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] lightingnerd@kbin.social 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I think #1 is a great idea, but it would take a lot of work and would probably be a pain to phase-in and phase-out across all platforms, but I do think it's a good idea, at least to offer as an option. While I am loathe to mention anything cryptocurrency and NFT-related, creating a simplified distributed ledger and smart contract system that would propagate through federated communities seems like an interesting idea. Alternatively, creating a way for users to specify their other usernames on other servers in a small bio in a profile page could be a possible compromise.

Your point #2 also sounds great, but I don't think this should be allowed between communities on defederated instances, because there's laws in many countries that can classify the act of hosting/providing certain content to be criminal. Therefore, if say if server_a resides in country_a, and country_a allows piracy, and server_b in country_b, and country_b considers it a criminal act to propagate certain information about piracy, the server_a/piracy and server_b/piracy might have different restrictions to discuss piracy. However, a less-informed mod may attempt to federate server_a/piracy and server_b/piracy, and insodoing accidentally make the owner/host of server_a unknowingly complicit in a criminal act.

I'm not a lawyer, and of course this is not intended to be legal advice, but I think that the effort would better be spent on implementing a solution to the decentralized identity problem, than the de-fragmentation of similar communities.

One other nugget to consider, assuming we were to replace Reddit, and the sum of the users on the fediverse were to achieve similar numbers to Reddit's glory days--we would definitely be scraped for AI training data. By keeping the communities fractured, that makes it far more difficult for a company to easily scrape all the information needed. While it might be trivial right now, in the ideally decentralized structure that the fediverse would take, it would take a lot more requests for a server to chase out every strand on every network.

Perhaps in this sense, it might be wise for instances to allow specific community defederation(ie, where server_a and server_b are federated, but server_a does not allow server_b/piracy to propagate(this may already be possible, IDK)), but I do not think it would be wise to allow community to community federation.

TL;DR: #1 is a great idea, OP, and it could be implemented in a simplified distributed ledger that propagates through federated communities, and uses a simplified smart-contract--or the problem could be solved by a compromise that allows users to specify their usernames for other instances in a small public bio. Addressing #2, this could cause legal problems in specific scenarios, rather it is more important for any instance to be able to disallow the propagation of specific communities from a federated server (if this isn't already possible).

[–] jcb2016_@mastodon.social 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (7 children)

@DaughterOfMars That’s why you do your research and create an account on a successful instance so you don’t have that problem. I have a lemmy account and mastodon. I have lemmy because of the blackout but didn’t know what I was doing. I note know how to use lemmy and mastodon from the user side of things. Lemmy for my subs and general looking at the sub home page and communities. Mastodon to chitchat and everything else

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Mintyytea@kbin.social 4 points 2 years ago

I think number 1 is important so it’s easier to move. Otherwise we could feel centralized to one instance rather than feeling free to federate

[–] heartlessevil@lemmy.one 3 points 2 years ago

How do decentralized identities interact with unique usernames? By Zooko's triangle, if identities are distributed and secure (implied by unique), the names are not human-meaningful. So we would be identified by public keys rather than usernames, like Tor onion addresses. Am I understanding this right?

[–] xtremeownage@lemmyonline.com 3 points 2 years ago (21 children)

Regarding point 1- if people would just stop signing up on lemmy.world, lemmy.ml, and beehaw.org, because they have the most people-

Things would go much smoother!

Pick an instance based on uptime, or hell, create your own instance.

Piling all of the eggs into a single basket is destined to result in failure.

[–] freeman@lemmy.pub 3 points 2 years ago (12 children)

For sure. But beehaw in a good example of aggressive moderating (which is totally their right) that can limit growth and why a decentralized approach is necessary. There can’t be a single massive place for x content. It’s rife for abuse. Allow it to be categorized and decentralized where beehaw can contribute but in their own way and users outside of beehaw can index and participate with them and even other instances that maybe beehaw defederated.

[–] DaughterOfMars@beehaw.org 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I don't think it's fair to call it "Aggressive Moderation". It's barely possible to moderate on Lemmy right now at all, and that's why they defederated. They simply cannot trust outside instances as much as their own, because they screen every user, and they can't keep up with moderation. Defederating is their only option until mod tools get better.

[–] freeman@lemmy.pub 3 points 2 years ago

I mean. It’s clearly subjective and I’m not judging whatsoever. It’s their prerogative and frankly I think there are some positives to it. And if it helps their space then that’s all that matters. I’m just a control freak and want to be in control of my account, backups, location etc.

But if you weren’t one that’s a troll on one of these others and were cut off it’s a tough pill too. I get there’s no easy answer.

When I looked at the mod log I was seeing some instances where, imho, it seemed aggressive policing of symantics. Individuals were t necessarily being offensive or trolling, though their opinions may not have been well formed or fully thought out or in line with others there and were bounced. And again that’s their call.

I’m not saying I would do better. In fact it’s why I’m not open and EVEN if I open my instance I’m not gonna have communities. I have no interest in policing fools that argue in bad faith or just want to get their jollies off angering others.

[–] retronautickz@beehaw.org 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Beehaw did nothing that isn't common in the fediverse. I know people that are new to all this may be shocked by Beehaw's decision, but defederating from intances that promote intolerant discourses or allow trolling is the way to keep an instance alive. People will end up suspecting and defederating from an instance that interacts with intances that allow or promote that type of content or behaviour.

[–] freeman@lemmy.pub 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Again. Its not a criticism of beehaw. Just kind of an example of you are who you associate with sometimes IRL, but in the fediverse. Its unfortunate for some honest folks that may have been bit in the crossfire, but given the options..it is what it is. And I understand why they are building what they are. I support that.

Its also a reason why having very large concentrated communities can be bad and why federation or de-centralization is important. But with that, it does appear we need some better tools for cross-instance moderation and cross-instance community grouping so that you can say...create a "technology multi-community" that includes technology@beehaw.org and technology@lemmy.ml and apple@whateverinstance.com or whatever etc. etc.

That would allow for decentralization but still give people the ability to browse them as one community and if you so happen to be registered on something like lemmy.world, then you cant see the beehaw.org content but can see the rest etc.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (20 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›