o_o

joined 1 year ago
[–] o_o@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I’m really not trying to be a dick, but uhh… Look around? The world is literally on fire and efforts to put it out or even to stop pouring more gas on it are put down at every turn by capitalists in the never ending pursuit of more money for it’s own sake.

Well I mean it's unclear to me that we're much worse than previous points in history. I'd rather have the climate crisis over the nuclear one, or either of the world wars, or live under a feudal system where I'm owned by the local lord in his castle.

I sympathize (and agree) with the belief that the current system isn't serving everyone, much less serving everyone equally. But the world is a complicated thing and we've got >7 billion people to feed! I think we should be very careful before deciding "yeah it's time to tear down the existing systems and hope that there are better systems out there". It's easier to make things worse than to make things better.

Let’s start here: are you a capitalist? Do you own any actual capital? I don’t mean your own house or car, that is personal property not private property or anything resembling the means of production.

I guess? I've wanted to start my own business a couple of times. I'm a programmer, so I've toyed with the idea and done some research into creating a few apps which I believe people would find useful, and might pay my bills. I don't own a house or a car-- I live in an apartment in a mid-size US city.

I ask because many people consider themselves capitalist when really they are just workers who happen to own a bit of personal property, and they make themselves essentially useful pawns for actual capitalists. And, if you’re not an actual capitalist, why are you so pro capitalism?

I'm guessing you'd consider me a pawn, but I don't. I fit your description of owning a bit of personal property, and being a worker. I've worked for some large companies in the past which are supposedly the "actual capitalists". But I promise they don't give two shits about social good (or social bad). They are just desperately trying to make products that people want to buy. In my view, it's a pretty good system which constrains huge organizations like Apple to making devices, when the alternative is that they could be setting up their own governments.

 

Hi all,

I'm seeing a lot of hate for capitalism here, and I'm wondering why that is and what the rationale behind it is. I'm pretty pro-capitalism myself, so I want to see the logic on the other side of the fence.

If this isn't the right forum for a political/economic discussion-- I'm happy to take this somewhere else.

Cheers!

[–] o_o@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago

I do the same! It works quite well.

[–] o_o@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago

Good to know, thank you!

 

Hey folks, was just thinking that one of the major benefits of forums is that it stores and indexes knowledge for the rest of time. I still regularly look up stackoverflow questions written years ago.

Are lemmy instances (such as https://programming.dev) going to be similarly indexed?

If there's been no thought on how to implement this, I was thinking that meta tags could be used to indicate to search engines that homegrown content (i.e. content that belongs to your own instance) should be indexed while federated content (i.e. content on your instance that was federated from other instances) should remain non-indexed.

That way, searching the title of this post on Google will only lead to a single result on the single instance that owns it.

Thoughts?

[–] o_o@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago

Personally I think we should add a differentiation between the storage policies of content which is owned by your own instance and content that federates from other instances.

The former should be kept for a long time (forever?), while the latter can be cleared more regularly.

 

cross-posted from: https://programming.dev/post/223663

Hey folks!

I've noticed that it's often difficult for newcomers to git to understand what the heck is happening and how the commands work.

Here's a flowchart that has helped me explain things in the past, and (more than once) folks have asked me for a copy of it to use as a cheat sheet. Hope it's helpful!

I’ve crossposted this in multiple places where I think it’s relevant. Hope y’all get some use out of it too! (Mods, please let me know if I should take it down)

EDIT: added non-transparent image, hopefully more visible for dark mode users.

 

Here’s a quick summary of the different ways you can load a website.

SSR (Server Side Rendering): The classic way. Browser makes request to server, server creates an HTML/CSS/JS bundle, sends it to browser.

CSR (Client Side Rendering): The vanilla React way. Browser makes a request to server, server sends back JS code which runs on browser, creating the HTML/CSS and triggering browser to further make requests to load all assets.

SSG (Static Site Generation): The “gotta go fast” way. Server creates an HTML/CSS/JS bundle for web pages at build time. When browser requests a page, the server just sends this pre-built bundle back.

ISG (Incremental Static Generation): The “imma cache stuff” way. Server may create some HTML/CSS/JS bundles for web pages at build time. When the browser requests a page, the server sends this pre-built bundle back. If a pre-built bundle doesn’t exist, it falls back to CSR while it builds the bundle for future requests. The server may auto-rebuild bundles after certain time intervals to support changing content.

ESR (Edge Slice Re-rendering): The “cutting edge, let's get latency down so low it's practically in hell” way. Server does SSG and tells the CDN to cache the bundles. Then, it instructs the CDN to update the bundle in the event that page content needs to change.

In order of performance, usually: (SSG = ISG = ESR) > CSR > SSR

In order of SEO: (SSR = SSG = ISG = ESR) > CSR

In order of correctness (will users be shown “stale” information?): (SSR = CSR) > ESR > ISG > SSG

[–] o_o@programming.dev -1 points 1 year ago

Agree! Defederation is a nuclear option. The more we do it, the more we reduce the value of "the fediverse", and the more likely we are to kill this whole project.

I think defederation should only be a consideration if an instance is consistently, frequently becoming a problem for your instance over a large period of time. It's not a pre-emptive action.

[–] o_o@programming.dev -1 points 1 year ago

If “botters” are willing to spend >$5 per bot on established instances, then I don’t believe this is a solveable problem. For the fediverse, or for ANY platform, Reddit included. I am perfectly human, and would be hard-pressed to decline a >$150/hour “job” to create accounts on someone’s behalf.

Like any other online community, constant vigilant moderation is the only way to resolve this. I don’t see how Lemmy is in any worse position than Reddit so I don’t think we need to be all “doom and gloom” quite yet.

As for botters creating their own instances…

For example, newly created domains might be blacklisted by default.

This is just a start. Federation allows for many techniques to solve this. Perhaps even a “Fediverse Universal Whitelist” with an application process. I’m excited for the possibilities, but again I don’t think it’s quite time to be overly concerned yet. These are solvable problems.

[–] o_o@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

There is NOTHING stopping these bots from just creating new instances, and using those.

I read somewhere that mastodon prevents this by requiring a real domain to federate with. This would make it costly for bots to spin up their own instances in bulk. This solution could be expanded to require domains of a certain “status” to allow federation. For example, newly created domains might be blacklisted by default.

[–] o_o@programming.dev 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Honestly, I’m interested to see how the federation handles this problem. Thank you for all the attention you’re bringing to it.

My fear is that we might overcorrect by becoming too defederation-happy, which is a fear it seems that you share. However I disagree with your assertion that the federation model is more risky than conventional Reddit-like models. Instance owners have just as many tools (more, in fact) as Reddit does to combat bots on their instance. Plus we have the nuke-from-orbit defederation option.

Since it seems like most of these bots are coming from established instances (rather than spoofing their own), I agree with you that the right approach seems to be for instance mods to maintain stricter signups (captcha, email verification, application, or other original methods). My hope is that federation will naturally lead to a “survival of the fittest” where more bot-ridden instances will copy the methods of the less bot-ridden instances.

I think an instance should only consider defederation if it’s already being plagued by bot interference from a particular instance. I don’t think defederation should be a pre-emptive action.

[–] o_o@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago

Agreed! This is annoying for me as well, but still I like it a lot. Better than Reddit, even.

 

Instances, of course, have some bot-mitigation tools which they can use to prevent signups, etc.

However, what’s stopping bots from pretending to be their own brand new instance, and publishing their votes/spam to other instances?

Couldn’t I just spin up a python script to barrage this post, for example, with upvotes?

EDIT: Thanks to @Sibbo@sopuli.xyz ‘s answer, I am convinced that federation is NOT inherently susceptible, and effective mitigations can exist. Whether or not they’re implemented is a separate question, but I’m satisfied that it’s achievable. See my comment here: https://programming.dev/comment/313716

[–] o_o@programming.dev 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I appreciate your commitment to this privacy consideration. I personally don’t think it’s the hill I’d prefer to die on, but I welcome your contributions.

[–] o_o@programming.dev 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Yes, that’s a fair point. Just because you send a “I have deleted this message” signal out into the universe doesn’t mean that everyone will receive or obey it.

I assumed that was understood.

But that’s very different from instances intentionally and malevolently keeping data despite indicating to users that it was deleted, which is what I think folks’ privacy concerns are about.

EDIT: What I mean is that the federation model is inherently non-private in a certain sense (but in the same sense that someone could take a screenshot of your Reddit comment and your deleting your comment won’t delete their copy). But Lemmy is not egregiously misusing data.

[–] o_o@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago

As far as I know (another assumption haha), there’s no universal IDs across the fediverse.

 

Hey folks! Just realized something that makes Lemmy different from Reddit. Because of the federation, your votes are not technically anonymous on Lemmy. At least, I think.

Although there’s no UI to look at a user’s voting history yet, one could conceivably be built by an instance. Perhaps coincidentally, I hear there’s instances out there populated by mostly bots?

view more: next ›