Hmm, unless the plan is to have a lot of reposts from TikTok, the real difficulty of these platforms is to have super easy to use video editing tools in the mobile app. And that is really a project all on it's own and requires a entirely different skillset.
You know, that's actually a really good point. Dansup tends to iterate on certain parts of his apps several times over, like how Pixelfed handles image uploads and filters prior to posting. It might be that just going with the simplest possible thing makes sense for right now, until a better approach can be devised.
The idea of a federated, decentralized Wikipedia alternative is intriguing, but implementing it successfully faces major hurdles. Federating moderation policies and privileges across different instances seems incredibly complex. I believe it would also require some kind of web of trust system. Quality control is also a huge challenge without centralized oversight and clear guidelines enforced universally.
While it could potentially replace commercial wiki farms like Wikia/Fandom for niche topics, realistically replacing Wikipedia's dominance as a general reference work seems highly ambitious and unlikely, at least in the short term. But as they say - shoot for the stars, and you may just land on the moon.
That said, ambitious goals can spur innovation. Even if Ibis falls short of usurping Wikipedia, it could blaze new trails and pioneer federated wiki concepts that feed back into Wikipedia and other platforms. The federated model allowing more perspectives and focused communities is worth exploring, despite the technical obstacles around distributed moderation and content integration. The proof-of-concept shows the core pieces are in place as a starting point.
as they say - shoot for the stars, and you may just land on the moon.
I've only ever heard, "shoot for the moon, [and] even if you miss you'll land among the stars", which is the phrase as it was first said by Norman Vincent Peale. But maybe swapping "moon" and "stars" is a common enough variant of the phrase that I just haven't heard before.
I can see why. Although the stars occupy a larger portion of the sky, they are also further away than the moon. So either version of the phrase makes sense in its own way.
More critically, the proof-of-concept so far appears to lack any real work on moderation tools or implementing a web of trust system. These would be absolutely vital components for a federated encyclopedia to have any chance of controlling quality and avoiding descending into a sea of misinformation and edit wars between conflicting "truths." Centralized oversight and clear enforced guidelines are key reasons why Wikipedia has been relatively successful, despite its flaws.
Without a robust distributed moderation system in place, a federated encyclopedia runs the risk of either devolving into siloed echo chambers pushing various agendas, or becoming an uncoordinated mess making it impractical as a general reference work. The technical obstacles around federating content policies, privileges and integrated quality control across instances are immense challenges that aren't obviously addressed by this early proof-of-concept.
While novel approaches like federation are worth exploring, straying too far from Wikipedia's principles of neutral point-of-view and community-driven policies could easily undermine the entire premise. Lofty goals of disrupting Wikipedia are admirable, but successfully replacing its dominance as a general reference work seems extremely unlikely without solving these fundamental issues around distributed content governance first.
First of all, congratulations for bringing a baby girl into this world!! You must be really excited! I am very happy for you!
This looks very cool. I set up a wiki (https://ibis.mander.xyz/) and I will make an effort to populate it with some Lemmy lore and interesting science/tech 😄 Hopefully I can set some time aside and help with a tiny bit of code too.
Thank you for creating and maintaining this space for us, I'm grateful for you and all of the other people working to keep things running and improving on lemmy. It is becoming harder and harder to find spaces for discussions that aren't corporate owned.
I can get people being cautious about for-profits trying to monetize user data, but trying to ruin this guy's life over it, regardless of whether or not he was actually trying to make money from their data, is just sick. Anyone who thinks this is an acceptable method of protest is fucked up in the head.
Considering how powerful is the copyright mafia (Remember that the pirate bay founder got jail-time) I totally understand why the people running the instance are doing so. I get why user are pissed off, but they're free to host their own instance and deal by themselves with the legal liability
I don't understand those who criticize Lemmy developers. They were developing it while you were not here, I don't think they will stop just because you are leaving :)
The current criticism is that dessalines and nutomic are choosing which features they are working on and which ones they incorporate into Lemmy in a way that people think to be very intransparent, undemocratic. That's not unsimilar to Mastodon, but there even Gagron has to bow to pressure from the community if something has a lot of support.
The current criticism is that dessalines and nutomic are choosing which features they are working on
That's not criticism that's entitlement. It's like telling the volunteers at the local soup kitchen how dare they not plant trees, and how undemocratic it is of them to not bow to your, specific, will. If you want those trees planted go ahead, plant them, noone's stopping you.
You completely missed the point, the emphasis is at the end of the sentence:
in a way that people think to be very intransparent, undemocratic.
Of course they call the shots. But you can do that in various ways. You can engage with people and include people in those decisions in various ways. Wikipedia for example does a technical survey every year, asking: "should we focus our technical work on area A, B or C? What do you guys think should be prioritized?"
That does not mean that some specific task needs to be prioritized just because one person wants that. But I heavily doubt that the devs have an idea how popular or unpopular certain ideas/wishes are with Lemmy's users.
in a way that people think to be very intransparent, undemocratic.
Of course they call the shots. But you can do that in various ways.
Go to github, look at the tickets, look at the PRs, look at the discussions. How is that intransparent. And, no, just like science FLOSS is not a democracy, and wikipedia is not a FLOSS project they're a bunch of dictionary editors paying people to work on mediawiki, the software that runs the site.
Look at that massive list and then switch from "enhancement" to "bug" and possibly understand why some of that stuff might take some time before it gets addressed.
Look at the massive amount of pull requests that get merged, authored by a gazillion of different people. None of them from beehaw.
popular
Is generally not how software development works. If you always do the most popular thing first what you end up is with a lightyear of duct tape holding together an abomination of technical debt. Also, to paraphrase Henry Ford: "If I had asked people what they wanted I'd have bred faster horses".
They're also not holding anyone hostage. I can see how people are tired of the whole "if you don't like it, fork it" argument, but Kbin, mbin, and Piefed are all perfectly viable and interoperable alternatives that are available already.
I can see how people are tired of the whole "if you don't like it, fork it" argument
This I didn't get. It's literally how FLOSS works and why we have so many distros of Linux, for example. If one doesn't like the philosophy, they don't have to use FLOSS platforms. Noone is entitled to exactly what they want from software that is designed and maintained by volunteers. The software is literally a gift; take it, fork it, or leave it.
This advisory will be edited with more details on 2024/02/15, when admins have been given some time to update, as we think any amount of detail would make it very easy to come up with an exploit.
But the commit to fix insufficient origin validation is already visible right there in the repo?
The lack of details in the advisory is only a minor impediment for a malicious person who wants to figure out how to implement their own exploit for this vulnerability. Anyone can read the patch that fixes it and figure it out.
TLDR: if you run your own instance, update it ASAP. If an instance you rely on hasn't updated yet, consider asking its admins to do so. And if they don't update it soon, you might want to reconsider your choice of instance.
And if they don't update it soon, you might want to reconsider your choice of instance.
The advisory went up about 4h ago. About 3h ago, my instance admin sent out an announcement that the patch had been applied. That was before I even heard about the issue.
This isn't possible with Ruby and Mastodon. The only way to distribute the patch is to reveal the changes to the source. FWIW, compiling the fix is still just an obfuscation method, one can still just diff the binaries and see what changed (see: reverse-engineering Windows vulnerabilities in updates).
At best, you can release it with a bunch of unrelated and obfuscating changes, but putting work into doing that is further delaying simply getting the fix released.
I can see why they would do this if their servers are in the US, Japan, Germany or another country with insane copyright laws. If not this move is stupid, almost as stupid as hosting your server in one of those countries.
Neither the server or community host copyrighted content. You can't even directly link to sources for it either per the community and server rules. All the community does is discuss piracy which isn't illegal
In the US you can apparently sue software companies that make software sometimes used for piracy so it apparently doesn't even need to be illegal there for people to shut it down if they are rich enough.
True, but let's not forget that Lemmy instances are hosted by ordinary people without the finances to employ high price legal teams. If they receive a threatening letter from (for example) Sony or Disney they still have to either acquiesce or find a lot of money very quickly to simply argue their case.
My favorate is I think it was them, right after they defedded lemmygrad they premptivly defedded hexbear... when Hexbear never had plans to federate with them
also I need to see this ... This will be hillarious, but I mean I would like to see .world try, if any instance could survive on their own it would be them, but I am not sure they can.
Liberals are ideologicaly pro capital, and pro IP, Piracy stands in the way of both of them. It would be expected that they would block it. Honestly just a matter of time
Because they're the ones toadying up to the actual capitalists; panting like dogs in heat for a crumb of acknowledgement from their self-selected 'betters'.
I mean are you trying to say I do not come into contact with enough instances? I mean I will fully admit that I am an out and out Marxist-Leninist, I do not see how that comes into play with me saying it is the most ideologicaly liberal and narrow of the instances I regularly contact.
I still do not see how my instance has to do with my political annalisis. I think my name would be a much more effective hit here. .ml is a general purous instance... I literaly have red army in my name. Not only does trying to say "Your a filthy red" not change my analisis, but you did not even use your one chance to chose the most obvious part ot say "OMG YOUR A FILTHY SCARY RED OMG YOUR COMING FOR MY TOOTHBRUSH" I mean, I cannot say I was expecting better, but I am disapointed none the less, my account is literaly the name of one of my dogs, and declaring they are a part of the Red Army, the Army of the USSR... I feel like that would have been a much easier grab
I'm not going to say liberals don't go there to shitpost like ML do here. But the admins on world haven't been summarily banning people for "tanky shit" like the ML admins have been banning for "liberal shit". The hypocrisy of your critique is why they rightfully call out those from there. You. Making them.
To be clear, I agree that world trends centrist to right. But as an anarcho communist anti Leninist I feel much more welcome here than ML. Though there definitely is nothing more on brand than ml hypocritically criticizing liberals and liberals hypocritically criticizing ml.
Yes I have been here for over 2 years, and before we get into it, we must understand where our biases are. When looking at a group the closer they are to you, the more difrent shades you can see. This is why I declared where I was, and why I would consider Lemmygrad more Ideoligistacly open than .World, because when I interact with people from that instance I can see more minor variations.
That being said Lemmy.world when I interact with them, I can play bingo with their answers, and I would say in ideological narrowness it would be either .world or beehaw. Not only this but the Anarchist hub tends to be Hexbear, that being a Left Unity instance, and Anti Leninists, I would like to hear more about this, because I have not heard a Luxemburgist in forever, and while I would love to say I have heard an Orthodox Marxist, most people who self identify like that are merly social democrats. .ML is a generalist instance, and I feel like the hate whip up is far overblown and agian part of my evidence for the ideological narrowness. Is moderation here perfect no, but ML does not ban for being "a liberal" they have a difrent reason behind it. If you want to be banned for being a liberal go to Lemmygrad or Hexbear.
Also I hate to blame it to you, but .world does do the summary banning for "Tanky shit" that is why they decided to without prompting to defederate with lemmygrad, because they could not handle communists existing. This is the reason they preimptivly defederated hexbear before they even joined, and this is the reason they are debating defederating .ML.
We all have biases and it is important to agnoledge them, and what they mean, I am free and open with mine. You have not been for yours.
It was a rhetorical question. It didn't require an answer. I can see what instance you're from. And even what instance this is posted to. And I know that even by saying the T word. Even though I refrain from using it personally. Only using it as others would slur you. Because you use liberal as such. All in furtherance of trying to point out the bad faith and hypocrisy on display.
I'm 50, from the US. Raised in a traditionally liberal family. Goth since the 80s, and absolutely a black sheep. I'll criticize liberals all day every day when they deserve it. No love for them here. I got nothing to hide. And frankly who you're close to. That's a red herring. You will almost never find someone who attacks ml power structures on countries more often and more viciously than people formerly from them.
Respectfully, I get that you have a lot of people disingenuously attacking your ideology as much as you do theirs. But people can and do have valid criticisms and problems with it. Despite being generally down for Marxism. I don't see any reason for anyone outside of my machine shop to own the means of production there. Only people from the shop should. Not some Baker who will never set foot in it. Not some politician in some politburo thousands of miles away.
Frankly we have huge issues here with not having enough parties actually able to represent people. I don't see how having less parties is going to fix that. Nor do I see the benefit of having a party in charge that would seek to jail me for life, possibly kill me, or brainwash me for dissenting with the state. There is no re-education. Only education and brainwashing. I will gladly take people ignoring me or looking at me incredulously over that sort of s*** any day.
Someone should tell Hong Kong. I'm sure that will make them feel much better. Considering everything that's been happening to them lately.
And I'll give you this much. Liberals disingenuously use ml as their main foil against any sort of leftism/socialism. To the point it seems to many uneducated people like ml might actually be the left as you claim. It's bs, there are lots of other types of leftists. But this is part of the problem with many ml. Denying and alienating all other leftists. And everyone else with the no true leftist schtick. That and the oppressive totalitarianism.
Fediverse
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.