if you transfer resources to them
I get what you're saying here and mostly agree, but just want to point out that you are transferring a resource - your labour. So it is a bit more nuanced than this.
SorteKanin
joined 2 years ago
I doubt they knowingly sponsored a project based on the developers’ political ideologies
But now they should know right? But the response makes it clear they don't really care. They want to include everyone in the "big tent", which clearly runs afoul of the paradox of tolerance. I am not a fan of their response.
It sounds like that would require unifying the architecture of all fediverse platforms, which nobody is interested in and very much goes against the point (decentralization). Right now all of these platforms are written independently, with unique architectures and different programming languages.
Suffice to say that, while it's a nice thought, what you're proposing is not really realistic, nor is it actually desired.
Matrix is not part of the fediverse, so that's kind of a special case and doesn't work the same at all as the rest.
What you describe sounds very simplified, but let me assure you that there is nothing simple about this problem (I say that as a software engineer that has studied ActivityPub, the protocol underlying the fediverse).
It feels like they could all be part of one unified platform.
They are. It's called the fediverse.
There's no reason why any of these software options couldn't support all the same stuff, as you say. But so far they have chosen not to.
Maybe another option will come along one day that supports more of it at once.
How comes movies aren't like this? I feel like there are so few movies but so many games.
This is like requiring people to read a specific text book before they vote in real life elections. I hope you can see the problem with that.
Wait, you're going to federate whether a user clicked on a link between instances?
That seems kinda too far. I would not want other instances to know what I have or have not clicked. That's a level of surveillance I'm not comfortable with and I fear how that data might be abused.
Tbh I wouldn't even want my own instance to track what I click
How would you know for remote users?
Let’s apply quality control on upvotes, so any post can get only 20 upvotes till it gets a specific amount of comments then the limit could be pumped up to 40 upvotes till it gets more comments, etc…
Ultimately this is just limiting ways that people can vote. Voting is the democratic way to sort posts. I don't think you can limit without ultimately influencing the system in unintended bad ways, since that will restrict how people can vote. Just let people vote.
The idea is that eventually they would stop scraping you cause the data is bad or huge. But it's a long term thing, it doesn't help in the moment.
view more: next ›
As much as "instance drama" can be a bit tiring, I think it might be an inevitable outcome and shouldn't necessarily be seen as completely bad. My thinking is that instance drama would not occur if all the instances were similar, and that would be bad. As it is, there are actually differences among the instances and that's good - some disagreements due to those differences is inevitable.
Now, it would be good if we could agree to disagree and still be friends... but that also moves into the paradox of tolerance. But I would say most instances have nothing strongly against each other, despite any differences in moderation or rules or approach. The Pareto principle applies too... probably 20% of the instances are responsible for 80% of the drama. If you don't like the drama, try avoiding those 20% of instances 😅.