Always has been

Currently, Lemmy communities appear as group accounts on mastodon which boost every post or comment posted to/in a community. This is effectively useless except for extremely low traffic communities maybe.

It’s not clear to me whether this is a Lemmy or Mastodon issue.

Even if it’s a losing battle, it feels like we have a better chance if we keep the alternative available.

That’s precisely what the mass-defederation is intended to do. From my PoV, defederating Facebook is the only way to keep “the alternative available” as otherwise it’d be drowned in shit and/or EEE’d.

Being federated can allow us to encourage users to ditch Meta’s platform and join an open one (ex. Mastodon, Firefish, etc.)

What you fail to mention here is that this goes both ways; it also allows Facebook to “encourage” users to switch to Threads.

“All your friends are on Threads, why do you keep using that weird Mastodon thing?”
“Oh, Threads has this cool new feature where you can use (insert current NFT AI tech bro grift here) but it doesn’t work with Mastodon.”

But yeah you’re right, the last time a tech giant embraced an open federated protocol, everyone and their mom started using the open platform instead. No wait, XMPP is fucking dead after Google did the third E.

Don’t let them have a monopoly over the use of ActivityPub. Grow the other platforms: The extend stage only works when the platform gets a near monopoly over use of the standard. That brings up the first action. If there are enough users, services and resources on things like Mastodon/Lemmy, then Meta (or any other company) can’t just extend the spec without causing their users to ditch Threads to stay connected to the content they want to see.

How tf do you expect that to work when they will start out with a 98.5% “market share” in the entire AP network?

Might aswell call it “Facebookverse” at that point because the entire rest of the Fediverse as we know it would be a drop in the bucket.

That’s right, in a world where the broader Fediverse federates with Facebook, Facebook’s starting conditions would be market dominance; a monopoly you might call it.

As long as there is a healthy community away from Meta (ex. what we have right now), then they can’t extend & extinguish.

Good luck having a decent conversation with two people when there are hundreds of people screaming about irrelevant trifles in the same room.

Protect the Standards and share why it is important

• Share posts from experts about strict adherence to standards, support regulatory and legal advocacy (interoperability requirements > etc.), and educate other users about the risks.

Facebook: We will muddy the waters around this upcoming competitor that could destroy our entire business model and drown it in noise. Users: Share posts from experts about strict adherence to standards, support regulatory and legal advocacy
Facebook: Oh no, not the expert posts! Ok, we will stop.

the way that activitypub works, the outgoing data is publicly available. Defederating with Meta doesn’t prevent that, and federating doesn’t give them any more data than they could get otherwise.

It is not. It is only available to federated instances and even to those it’s almost always a subset because not every user/community is followed. Due to Facebook’s sheer size, they would probably receive pretty much everything from any instance federated with them.

If they were defederated, they’d have to scrape every instance’s API to actually export everything. Not a real blocker but much more difficult, expensive and legally questionable. (See the recent popularity in imitative statistical algorithms aka. “”“AI”“” or “Copyright condoms” as I like to call them.)
Additionally, this opens up Fediverse users to Facebook tracking in things like DMs. I’m aware they’re not E2EE and you should therefore not expect secrecy from them but putting them into a known bad actor’s hands is quite a lot worse.

It’s more of an issue when data start coming IN to Lemmy from Mastodon and Meta’s Threads.

…that’s precisely what defederation is about. You can’t stop someone from scraping your API but you can stop their toxic waste from flowing into your healthy platform.

All Fediverse platforms will have to work on content moderation and misinformation. Platforms like Meta, focussed on profit and advertising, will likely moderate in a way that protects their income. Those moderation decisions will be federated around.

Moderation is a problem with our Fediverse platforms already, how tf do you expect us to do the work for Facebook’s platform in addition to that when it’s like 100x the size of the entire Fediverse?

develop USEFUL but safe and open algorithms for the feeds

There is no such thing. The only reason our current feeds aren’t full of shit is because the general signal to noise ratio is still quite high. Refer to the conversation in the room example above.

That’s cool but are the videos on Pixelfed long enough for WebP2P to work? I imagine the median video length on Pixelfed would be seconds rather than minutes as it would be on Peertube.

The link you posted is a post by a mod announcing that they will enforce the policy given to them by the LW admins.

From the modlog I can tell that (presumably) you posted a text post to !politics@lemmy.world about the policy that was then removed.

If you’re posting to !politics@lemmy.world, such posts would obviously be removed because that’s A. not on topic (that’d be a topic for !lemmyworld@lemmy.world. ) and B. not a link to an article. The latter is also the reason given for the removal.

Stirring up drama over absolutely nothing usually ends up hurting someone. Could you not?

I can’t remember the last time I saw a graph starting at a non-zero value where it showed anything other than noise whereas they almost always skew my initial impression of the data. If there’s no point in doing it but a major downside, I see no point in having them for any reason other than to mislead people.

Indeed the right sides of the graph start at 0. The left side does not.

Note that 2000/h (10^3) aren’t all that significant when there’s already 14000000 (10^7) users present.

What a terrible graph. That “huge” spike is a mere 0.5% increase. That might as well be noise.

Don’t believe any graph whose y-axis starts at any value but 0 people.

I was being a bit unclear here, what I meant was that replies mentioning a hashtag shouldn’t show up as posts in its pseudo-community; only posts. Replies to a post with a hashtag would show up regardless of content.

I’d see this to be implemented in Lemmy itself. Hashtags are a global thing, not instance-specific, and should already be available to Lemmy via AP.

Lemmy would “just” need the ability to display a hashtag as a “community” containing posts made under that hashtag. Question is what to do with replies but given Lemmys design, they could probably simply be left out because, if it’s truly on-topic, the post will likely contain the hashtag too and therefore land in the hashtag “community”.

I don’t know what you’re getting excited about here; this is all publicly available information which Facebook could scrape at any time they wanted (federated or not), even right this very second.

I thought it’d be issue/MR discussions because that’d be a fairly obvious application of AP but it’s actually for MRs themselves? Wow.

Git forges are the only remaining non-federated social platforms that I still heavily use.

With AP, we might finally be able to build a forge network that could become a viable public hosting alternative to GitHub.

For me it says @strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz, not @null. Clicking on your comment’s Fediverse button to take me to your instance still shows the same.

Looks like a hash, so it’s likely using a content-addressed-store here. How else are they supposed to ID images?

I don’t see how cellphones or CGNAT play into this. If you can send real-time voice data in a web call P2P in your browser (webrtc), you can send semi-real-time video data P2P aswell.

Hello there browser which already implemented DRM similar to this a while ago!

Not directly but this could be an antitrust case in some places.

The browser could just refuse to attest if you’ve got an ad blocker enabled. That’s the whole point of this.

You did not specify that you need a 10-bit capable decoder. Given that the screen is 8-bit, that would be kind of unusual to have outside of niche applications such as this one.

8 vs. 10 bit shouldn’t make the image look better outside of toning down banding artefacts. There might be an indirect colour transformation taking place here.