I love the idea of taking on a monopoly, but I don’t like that, without regulation, it has a low chance of success, and the consumer gets to suffer as the monopoly fights back.

It does make sense. I wonder if the admins checked to see how many users (were) subscribed to nsfw? Not that a subscription equals a content consumer, but it’s a strong indicator.

Possibly. Power is just representing others via. their trust in you. Trust can be earned, purchased, or stolen.

I don’t think the blahaj admins bought their users off. I also don’t think they oppress them. I can only reasonably conclude their doing what they think is right.

If the users agree, stay on the instance, and are happy there’s not really any discussion to be had.

I like the instance and it sucks to see it defederate period. I can’t really say what reasons are right or wrong universally, except for criminal stuff. IMO.

Slaps roof: “It’s our Lemmy Certified Quality Discussion©️Guarantee!” : “You won’t always like the conversation.”

long pause

Customer: “but?”

Slapper: “But what?”

Customer: “You won’t always like the conversation, but…”

Slapper: “Oh! No, that’s it’s. That’s the guarantee.”

If the blahaj admin(s) are working in the best interests of their users, and/or moderating out criminal content then that’s just swell.

On the other hand, if they’re trying to control other people… that’s bad form.

I always cringe when I hear: “you live under my roof, you live under my rules.” This has that kind of “feel;” yea?

A quick, but a little dirty solution for this, would be communities having “tags” in their metadata. This wouldn’t prevent spam, or an accumulation of four trillion tags, but you could easily add “only these tags,” or “not these tags,” to any feed. User objects have metadata that is used like this (as the “bot” flag) already. I’m just familiar enough with the code to know it wouldn’t be a slam dunk, but it’s also not a breaking change or re-write!

I had a “bearstein effect” moment just now. I had thought wireshark sold out. Like “Wireshark by Rapid7,” but i just checked and it looks like they’ve stayed the FOSS course! Way to go!

If the only criteria to be in a private channel for admins is being an admin, there’s no use making it private. ;) Unless your just looking to filter out bad actors who don’t want to take 5 min and 5$ to make an instance.

FYI for anyone looking to deface more instances, That list is only updated every 24 hours. Depending on when it last run on your home instance, the info could be out of date.

You’re not misunderstanding. They just solve more than one issue, and create a few too.

That’s a personal preference though. You don’t have a need for a relay. There are more than a few people who want to run their own instance and at least browse all the things without having to subscribe to them. This is a news aggregator at the core after all.

I’ve been pondering trying to make one, but it’s not going to be a cake-walk. The tool (that was a script) I wrote ruffled some feathers for it’s potential to destroy the lemmyverse. While I don’t believe that could happen. I’m still interested in something easier and more integrated.

The theory is simple and I am willing to take a stab at it, but there might be road blocks trying to make or incorporate changes to the actual lemmy code.

People can defederate from an instance for any reason they want, but if I get what you’re trying to say: you think people should defederate from any instance that has a user that subscribes to all of their communities.

I actually wrote it with the flip side of your centralization argument in mind. If a community exists outside of the popular ones a user may never even know of its existence. Having more show up SHOULD be better to prevent centralization no? It requires the users to change their browsing behaviour but at least they don’t have gonsearching offsite.

$14.80

The weird rage people have about this. I’m not sure where it comes from. If there are 100 communities, only the top 1-5 will contribute 90% of the content. If you have even one user subscribed to the top 20 or 50 communities, you are already likely getting 90%+ of this traffic. After subscribing to literally every community in the lemmyverse, I promise your instance will not see any meaningful increase. I’m willing to be proven wrong, but not one of the ragers has offered a credible reason other than fears based on misunderstanding. No offense.

Yup. 256 GB should be enough database space for anyone though.

I think your idea is on the right track when thinking longer term and assuming the worst case in both design and admin behavior. :)

The whole network needs to be split into “active” and “archive.” New activity (or at the very least stubs to where new activity is happening) needs to be updated regardless of where it occurs without having to capture anything extra.

It increases load during execution. Afterward it’s not significant. My instance is heavily instrumented and monitored. The load this incurs subscribing to 24000 communities is less than adding a single, moderately active user to your instance.

It’s a huge miss if the intended design was to silo information.

What this provides, as far as I’m concerned, is essential to prevent centralization to a few instances.

Is there a better way to do it inherently in Lemmy itself? Probably, and I am excited to help with that!

It increases load during execution. Afterward it’s not significant. My instance is heavily instrumented and monitored. The load this incurs subscribing to 24000 communities is less than adding a single, moderately active user to your instance.

It’s a huge miss if the intended design was to silo information.

What this provides, as far as I’m concerned, is essential to prevent centralization to a few instances.

Is there a better way to do it inherently in Lemmy itself? Probably, and I am excited to help with that!