A million and one people said they'd leave Reddit if old. got shut down. Let's see if they come.

@silverpill@mitra.social ok thanks! Will take a look.

> @rimu@piefed.social said in PieFed v1.7 is released: Following People, Faster Browsing & Smarter Moderation: > > Send a DM to a user asking them if they are a bot, with 1 click. If they do not respond their account is automatically flagged as a bot

As someone whose email inbox numbers in the thousands, I'm not sure how I feel about this one.

Correct. It's intentional to keep users and communities unique since webfinger, the identification protocol used by AP, is understood to refer to one user at a time (although it doesn't preclude it from sending multiple, which it does in the case of Lemmy.)

Lemmy will prioritize users over communities, which means you can essentially render a community unfindable if you make a user account of the same name. Oops!

Or maybe it's the other way around, I forget.

There's the problematic fact that open weight LLMs are still trained by these corpos, which definitely has some environmental impact. It's troubling.

However what doesn't? As long as I'm not actively burning absurd amounts of fossil fuels running queries...

It's tough to know where to stand when it comes to AI. I don't think anybody here is hoping that the fediverse be overrun with LLMs and bring about the dead internet theory.

A large part of why people join the fediverse (and the threadiverse, too) is to get away from corporatization, and AI is definitely part of that too.

I just don't think we need to go to extremes to ban AI-generated content, but more importantly, this is not a decision that can be made globally. It must be done (and enforced, however we do that) instance by instance.

well there's an NSFW Lemmy and Piefed instance now :smirk:

> @auster@thebrainbin.org said in Are people backing up the fediverse?: > > Are people backing up the fediverse?

Threadiverse people: yes that's a good idea. Also this is already done because of how the threadiverse works.

Microblog people: are you insane that's a violation of my privacy. You're not allowed to scrape my public posts. *blocks*

> @stamets@lemmy.dbzer0.com said in Rimu Mass Bans Users: > > Rimu pushed a piece of code into Piefed a few days ago specifically to silence criticism against him and to silently delete/block posts on Piefed.

Extremely concerning.

I knew there was hardcoded stuff to block instances, but this goes further... got a link?

@bentigorlich@gehirneimer.de I think with public groups this is less of a concern. They're public after all, votes included

In NodeBB votes (of the up variety) are de facto public, only downvotes are hidden.

> @bentigorlich@gehirneimer.de said in A more private way to distribute votes: > > So my proposal would be: votes are only sent to the author of a post. The author then sends an Update activity to their followers and the magazine the post belongs to.

My concern is that this goes against the implicit assumption that the group actor (the community/magazine/category) is the source of truth.

The group actor is the clearinghouse of data in 1b12 style federation, and it would be a departure to change votes to only be sent to the target.

Fwiw when someone upvotes on NodeBB, it gets blasted everywhere too!

I would recommend that votes continue to be sent to group actors, who then decide whether to announce it (old behaviour) or keep quiet and wait for the update before announcing (new behaviour).

It would mean vote synchronization would be less reliable however.

Also this goes directly against @rimu@piefed.social's vote batching proposal.

Perhaps it's less "I should be able to see everything anybody has said about dogs" to "I should have the ability to..."

For many on traditional social media it's an expectation, even if they're being lied to (they're only seeing a subset based on language, preference, and a thousand other metrics).

On the fediverse it's more plainly visible that you're not getting everything, but that can be a feature, too, not a bug.