If anyone knows anything about what I did wrong or what I can do to fix it, I'd appreciate it.
My Linux peoples that helped me get the instance started are away right now but should be back in a few hours hopefully😬
Boosts appreciated!
Edit: Honestly, I've gotten some advice from you kind folks and I think it might be over my head. I'm gonna step away from the PC for a bit and recollect my thoughts and I might try some stuff when I come back.
@stgiga Even #Mastodon is not the original #Fedi software. That title belongs to an extinct software that’s even older than #GNUSocial & #Hubzilla (which both are older than Mastodon). For more details on Fedi history, check this timeline compiled by @youronlyone/@youronlyone who corrected some of my own misconceptions & wrong thoughts about Fedi stuff.
@stgiga@youronlyone@youronlyone & talking about #Fedi history by the way, since the doc itself says it is a living doc, there are a few notable instances not yet mentioned there that were recently developed by high-profile (or at least notable enough for us) Fedi users & might have verifiable links or posts that can give them a place within the doc’s timeline:
• #Fedibird (#Mastodon fork) by @noellabo
• #Sharkey (a very popular #Misskey fork) by @Amelia (& others from the @Sharkey project) since 2023
• maybe #IceShrimp (#Firefish fork?), unsure if it’s notable enough for inclusion or if supported by verifiable links (even I don’t know who created it).
I leave it up to @youronlyone whether certain popular extensions (if not forks per se) like #GlitchSoc (extending Mastodon) & #Soapbox (extending or modifying #Pleroma) can be added to the timeline as well.
Also, I will definitely not suggest for inclusion (or even a footnote mention) a certain #Akkoma fork that was given an obscene name by a fringe group of people (let’s just pretend it never existed, OK?) :ablobcatknitsweats:
Well well....I'm PLEASANTLY surprised by Oliphant pulling his advocation for .art being involved in his blocklists and no longer even hosting ANY Tier besides Tier 0 or the "DNI" list!
That means I'm no longer on "Oliphant's Tier 3 blocklist" for lies by .art...because it no longer exists!
If you aren't aware, the BlueSky-Fediverse bridge known as BridgyFed is live now.
Back when it was announced, there was a small window of time when it was added to the Oliphant's Tier 0 blocklist.
If you are using this blocklist and WANT to be federated with BlueSky, please double check to make sure you don't have the version of the list that it appears on. You may have blocked the bridge and not even know it.
The domain you want to look for is: brid.gy
Please boost for reach, so your admin knows of this possible issue. Thanks. 🙏
Wow! All my Bluesky posts are backfilling now into my instance! That's cool! I'd guess this "feature" isn't available for the BlueSky side of things....🤔
If anyone notices posts on my profile from older than today, please reply to this and let me know! If you're on BlueSky, you need to follow @ap.brid.gy before you reply or I won't see it here. (This post is federating to BlueSky through a Fediverse-BlueSky bridge)
Recent events have spurred some great discussion of fediverse safety and the ways that we can improve it. I'm thrilled to see the growing interest in this problem, but there's one specific angle that concerns me. Specifically, the push for allow-list federation.
First, some background information. Federation between instances is usually controlled by restricting which remote instances (identified by domain name) can send or receive messages from the local instance. In the majority of fedi servers, this is implemented with a "deny list" - a list of instance domains that should be blocked. When using a deny list, all unlisted domains can communicate by default.
This is in contrast with an "allow list", which specifies the domains that should not be blocked. When using an allow list, all unlisted domains are blocked and can not communicate. Deny-list federation is open except for specific routes, and allow-list federation is closed except for specific routes. There are other approaches, but these are by far the most common.
Now, moving on to my actual point. I've recently seen some discussion of using allow-list federation as means to improve user safety. This idea, while very well-intended, is unfortunately flawed and could easily cause more harm than it prevents.
This idea suggests that by limiting federation to known, approved domains, then it becomes easier to block sources of abuse, hate, and illegal content. This is actually quite effective, and some instances are already using allow lists to great effect. They experience minimal contact with dangerous instances, and those that slip through are easy to identify and block. It's a great strategy for specific communities. Unfortunately, however, this approach cannot scale.
Allow-list federation works well for a minority of instances, but only because the majority do not use it. This is due to the network effect. Just as a centralized social network can collapse if there are too few connections between users, a federated social network can collapse if there are too few connections between nodes (instances).
With open or deny-list federation, all nodes are connected to all others. This forms a very strong network - so strong that small and even single-user nodes are possible. The open federation ensures that there are always sufficient connections to keep the network useful.
The same is not true of allow-list federation. In this mode, the network nodes are only connected to a limited subset of others. As the percentage of allow-list nodes increases, the number of connections decreases exponentially. The resulting network is weak and unstable enough to collapse under pressure. A bigger problem, however, is not the network weakness but rather the loss of small instances.
In my experience, it's rare to see a federation allow-list with more than 1,000 entries. Fediverse index websites currently show around 25,000 active instances, which means that most allow-list instances are connected with only 4% of others. We can assume that the 4% is biased towards medium-to-large instances because of their increased visibility. After all, an instance cannot allow-list another node until they've encountered it through a mutual. Larger instances have more mutuals, and thus a greater chance to be discovered.
Over time, this creates an imbalance where larger instances benefit from a richer and broader network than smaller nodes, who have limited reach and reduced federation. Any new instance must somehow maintain a user base while faced with network isolation. This becomes a significant barrier to entry for the fediverse.
This barrier effect is bad enough, but there's another angle to consider. Fedi is large enough to have a constant churn of small instances starting up and shutting down. Currently, more instances are forming than closing, which leads to positive growth in the number of nodes - a good thing for network health. But if it was harder to start a new instance? That ratio would drop or even reverse, causing the network to shrink instead of grow. Reduced network size increases the network effect, which expands the inequality, which strengthens the barrier, which decreases the growth, which reduces the network size. A classic feedback loop.
This process would be devastating for fedi. The cycle would continue until there's no new instances at all, by which point we'd have lost the rich ecosystem of tiny communities that make fedi unique. Large instances can never provide a truly safe space, and often foster a community much like Twitter - problems included. The small, diverse instances are what make this network special. If we lose that, then we lose the fediverse.
If your profile and posts are set to "public" and you can read this very post, you should have no sense of "privacy" here on Fedi. That means ANYONE can reply.
There's 20,000+ instances and new ones every day, there's NO WAY to tell who is accessing your posts or what they're doing with them.
Fediverse is not some kinda "bastion for privacy" nor is there any sort of "consent" required to see your posts if they are public.
The only way you can be 100% sure that your followers are the only ones that directly see your posts is to make your profile and posts private. Even then, screenshots exist.
Remember, you're on the internet. Once you post it, it's probably not going away. This is true everywhere.
Nie wiem czym to jest spowodowane, ale w #Fedi jeszcze nie spotkałem się z kimś, kogo bym serio nie lubił.
Była jedna osoba, do której miałem uraz, ale jej wybaczyłem (chociaż może w sumie nawet o tym nie wie).
Na innych socjalach mam po kilkanaście bloków. A tu po prostu fajni ludzie są, niezależnie od poglądów 😊
A jeśli też lubisz ludzi na Fedi, napisz podobny wpis lub zboostuj ten 😉🚀
If there were ever a single post that truly shows how running a Fedi instance is, that I could boost to the moon, it's this one.
People still somehow think that Fedi is "opt-in" or "privacy focused" or even "community focused". None of these things are true and I wish more people understood.
It's not a BAD thing, per se. I like it, personally. I choose who I want to interact with by blocking those instances I DON'T want to interact with, but it's OPEN BY DEFAULT is something some people can't grasp.😬
Hello @dansup thanks for all the work you're doing on #fedi stuff! - #Pixelfed Android App says coming soon but I thought it was already released - am I being dim?
I like that bigger platforms like Flipboard are starting to federate. Though, with a supposed 150m+ accounts, its kinda strange that I don't get much boosted to my timeline....
I guess there isn't much on Flipboard that's within my interests...🤔 🤷♂️
Can folks on Flipboard.com follow Fedi folks? It's something I always wondered, since they seem to be the biggest platform that has enabled ActivityPub in good faith, unlike Meta😬
Ach te ciągłe wojny rządów i platform #GAFAM, ludzi i platform, platform o jeszcze większe wpływy z reklam i dominację nad innymi platformami, to "grodzenie ogrodów" by nie wpuścić treści z zewnątrz i nie pozwolić osobom wychodzić z treściami poza platformę. To ciągłe manipulowanie algorytmami, wpływanie na opinię publiczną, wywoływanie zaangażowania emocjami i gniewem...
Jak dobrze, że w #Fedi tego nie ma. #Fediwersum jest tworzone przez ludzi dla ludzi. Nie dla kasy, a dla stworzenia platformy dyskusji i komunikacji przyjaznej ludziom. Nie rządom czy korporacjom.
Jestem szczęściarzem, że mogę w tym współuczestniczyć :)
Cytat:
"Chiny nakazują Apple usunięcie aplikacji Meta po „podżegających” postach na temat prezydenta
WhatsApp, Threads, Telegram i Signal usunięte z Apple App Store w Chinach."
I said it elsewhere, but I say it here too, I HATE how corporate social media sites have taken SOCIAL out of social media.
Thankfully the Fediverse is mostly taking that back. But if we don't expand to get those that are still on corporate social media to move here, then we'll just become the echo chambers we hate. That's why the Threads integration is a good thing. We need to expand.
Do any apps allow you to login to multiple #fedi accounts and view all of the timelines combined? #fedilab ?
That is, merge #mastodon, #pixelfed, etc. Homes into a single Home... Same for notifications, local feeds, global feeds etc? For extra credit, boost across multiple accounts.
PSA: Since Threads apparently will be federating replies soon, I thought I should post this again, because there's still a lot of people that don't know.
When a normal user uses "block this domain" it's LITERALLY just a MUTE. The blocked server can still see, interact, and reply to your posts, you just won't be able to see them.
It's kinda like sitting in a room with hungry bears while wearing a blindfold. If you're scared of hungry bears, your best bet is to get out of the room, not put a blindfold on. And by this, I simply mean to migrate to an instance where the blocks are up to your standard on the "instance" level.
Stay informed and make informed decisions, no matter what you choose to do with your Fediverse presence.
It's basically "Bluesky, but FOSS". You have your account that has more control of moderation for the user.
The difference is that on Nostr nobody can "ban" per se because nobody has control over each other. It's block and mute. That's your moderation and you do it yourself. Nobody does it for you, unlike Fedi or BlueSky.
I gotta say, that's where a lot of you really need to go to have your eyes opened to what the Fediverse is really like for those of us on single user instances and the sheer amount of work unpaid moderators and admins do here to keep these instances as "nasty shit free" as they can.
Awhile back I kept seeing things like "Other platforms have moderation issues, there's CP and all kinds of other nasty stuff there".
There's all that here too, you're just privileged to have people with massive amounts of passion for this place and do the unpaid work to block and remove all that shit.
If you actually had any control in what you're allowed to see or not see, it can end up being the wild west for all things bad. Which is okay for those who don't mind blocking and muting endlessly (What Fediverse unpaid mods and admins do every day), but I'd bet a lot of you won't want to do that because it sounds HARD and potentially gross and traumatic.
So, whenever you think "that other platform is bad because their moderation sucks". Maybe, just maybe, think about if you would want to sit there all day looking at nasty shit like CP and other sexual crimes/hate speech/scams/etc. and have a little sympathy for the actual people who do. Because it sucks and it does exist here, you just don't see it.