this post was submitted on 17 Jun 2023
184 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37739 readers
500 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Like many, when the recent defederation went down, I decided to create a couple other logins and see what the wider fediverse has had to say about it.

I've been, honestly, a bit surprised by the response. A huge portion of people seem to be misidentifying communities as belonging to "lemmy" as opposed to the instances that host them. I think a big portion of this seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding of what this software is, and how it works.

For example, lemmy.world users are pissed at being de-federated because it excludes them from Beehaw communities. This outrage seems wholly placed in the concept that Beehaw's communities are "owned" by the wider fediverse. This is blatantly not how lemmy works. Each instance hosts a copy of federated instances' content for their users to peruse. The host (Beehaw in this example) remains being the source of truth for these communities. As the source of truth, Beehaw "owns" the affected communities, and it seems people have not realized that.

This also has wider implications for why one might want to de-federate with a wider array of instances. Lets say I have a server in a location that legally prohibits a certain type of pornography. If my users subscribe to other instances/communities that allow that illegal pornography, I (the server admin) may find myself in legal jeopardy because my instance now holds a copy of that content for my users.

Please keep this in mind as you enjoy your time using Lemmy. The decisions that you make affect the wider instance. As you travel the fediverse, please do so with the understanding that your interactions reflect this instance. More than anything, how can we spread this knowledge to a wider audience? How can we make the fediverse and how it works less confusing to people who aren't going to read technical documentation?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] trachemys@iusearchlinux.fyi 35 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Defederating lemmy.world is a temporary measure as better mod tools are made. It isn’t worth handwringing over. Defederation should not be the norm for dealing with a few trolls, or objectionable communities.

[–] Cipher@beehaw.org 25 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

This isn't handwringing, though I can understand why it might come off that way. This is simply mulling over how things "actually work" in the fediverse as opposed to how people believe it works. I believe that many people have a fundamental misunderstanding of what this software is and how it works. This is an educational issue that we have an opportunity to begin sorting out

In addition, my scenario of instance users subscribing to illegal content will still be valid even with moderation tools. The only way to stop that currently is defederation with instances hosting illegal content.

[–] trachemys@iusearchlinux.fyi 15 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Federation/Fediverse should mean a user of any instance should be able to use any community. Gated communities shouldn’t be the expected norm. So, I would agree with the lemmy.world people who are upset at being broadly blocked from a Fediverse community. But it doesn’t matter because beehaw says it is temporary.

[–] rknuu@beehaw.org 28 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This is true, except for one element:

Fediverse should mean a user of any instance should be able to use any community the instance elects to federate with. Lemmy is open by design, but instances can just as easily switch that feature off and go to a allowlist method.

A commonly missed element with federation is that you federate with who you trust since you essentially mirror their content. It's less apparent with the lemmy migration, but mastodon used to caution its users to "join an instance that aligns with your preferences" for this reason.

Federation is really a philosophy about mutual trust, just like how email providers can block messages by user, instance, or domain.

Trust me, there's likely more gating present than you're aware of. Maybe not at lemmy.world (which as of this post is only blocking one site for reasons I won't mention), but this can get dark pretty quick if you leave things completely open.

[–] klangcola@reddthat.com 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A major instance (in terms of comunities) like Beehaw changing from denylist to Allowlist would be devastating for users on small and single-user instances, so I hope it never comes to that. Unless there's some process to get hundreds of tiny unknow instances in the Allowlist

I think some people see Lemmy as a way to host their own self-supported community on their own server, with users identifying strongly with the values of the instance, and with cohesion among the users of the instance.

While other people (me included) see instances more as something to just host the account, so we can participate in Commities across "the network", where "the network" is basically all the Lemmy instances except the de-federated extremists, or other walled gardens. User-cohesion is more on the Community-level and less on the Instance-level.

Do we want a small network of instances that have proven themselves trustworthy? Or do we want a large network of instances that have yet to prove themselves untrustworthy? Different people will have different answers

You do bring up a good point about needing to trust your federated instances because you're essentially mirroring their content

[–] david@feddit.uk 3 points 1 year ago

This is the kind of respectful, well informed, nuanced debate that I used to have on reddit and missed terribly until I joined the fediverse. I'm worried it's going to take some fairly firm moderation to keep it from nastifying in the future.

There's a bit of a culture clash going on in these defederation debates between the "yay it's the wild west, reddit admins can't tell us what to do, we can go anywhere and do anything" folks on the one hand and the "yay it's collaborative, reddit admins can't tell us what to do, we can build community and do our own thing and have our own rules" folks on the other.

I think that just as much as we as individuals can go where we like and interact with what we want, mods can set up whatever instances they want with whatever rules and federation boundaries they want.

Sooner or later two people's freedoms bump into each other and someone's desired freedom to say something hits someone else's desired freedom from hearing something.

I think that painting defederation as a destabilising nuclear option that will kill the fediverse is as extreme as saying the same of moderation. The mods at beehaw decided that defederation was the best solution in the short term to some problems including some highly nasty content that pretty much everyone condemns, without themselves becoming overwhelmed. I respect that. Beehaw is, as far as I can tell, a great place, and I'm sure it takes a lot of work to keep it that way. The beautiful and intricate garden you're walking through might not be able to exist without the wall separating it from the pigs next to it. I know you're not a pig, but also you know that the wall isn't a huge deal, given that there's a gate.

[–] Cipher@beehaw.org 4 points 1 year ago

Thank you for phrasing my point so eloquently.

[–] Cipher@beehaw.org 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't think that assertion is based in reality. A server has to be hosted somewhere, and admins will generally choose to uphold those local regulations for the sake of their instance's own longevity. Federation has never meant that you communicate with literally every other instance. This isn't Tor where nodes pass along communications that don't directly involve themselves.

[–] trachemys@iusearchlinux.fyi 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Two separate issues are prompting “defederation”. Blocking users from posting to your local community and blocking remote communities from being mirrored on your server. Those should be handled differently. Beehaw didn’t want trolls posting mean things and blocked every user on a server. Your concern about illegal content would be more a complaint about specific communities that feature that content.

Either way you shouldn’t blame an entire server for a few users or communities you don’t want. Expecting everyone on a instance to be like minded isn’t going to work.

[–] Cipher@beehaw.org 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The only way to not address things on a per-server basis is for moderation tools to be expanded in scope. Maybe that will be how things work one day, but it is not how things can work right now.

[–] trachemys@iusearchlinux.fyi 2 points 1 year ago

Completely understandable. I am not opposed to moderation or keeping people safe from harassment.

[–] polaroid@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

It's a stopgap measure until better moderating tools are developed. I can't blame them for it.

[–] RoboRay@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

If that's the only way to stop harassment, yes, you do... anyone on that instance that isn't like-minded with the behavior that instance permits is well-advised to leave it for one better suited to their own beliefs.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Hotchpotch@beehaw.org 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

By that line of reasoning all alt-right, homophobe, harassing, doxxing, trolling etc. instances should be allowed to access every other instance to spread their hate. Is that really what you want? I don't.

[–] trachemys@iusearchlinux.fyi 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Why do you think entire instances will be devoted to that? You will have to block every instance that has open registration, since any open instance cannot guarantee one of the people you mentioned will not come in. I guess the issue I have is that I see moderation as something between users and communities. Not that the overall instance should be doing the moderation.

[–] cnnrduncan@beehaw.org 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Because entire instances have already devolved to that and thus been blocked by the wider fediverse.

[–] alyaza@beehaw.org 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

yeah this is like everything on our defederation list besides lemmygrad, shitjustworks, and lemmyworld

[–] freeman@lemmy.pub 3 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Is there a central place to track these instances?. Or do you all have a text list or the reasons you defederated some that you may be open to sharing (even privately). I was looking for something specifically to avoid things like illegal content and the like.

[–] cura@beehaw.org 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The defederated list does not include reasons and we can’t add it from Lemmy’s tools. The Lemmy instances we’ve defederated from memory are : Hexbear.net and Lemmygrad.ml because they deny certain genocides, exploding-heads.com and lemmygrad.com because they are queerphobic, burggit.moe because they host child pornography.

https://beehaw.org/comment/300942

[–] TKilFree@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago

You might be interested to know that, as luck would have it, this was the first issue I picked up when scrolling through looking for a good introductory task to get used to the project: https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/pull/3168

So this might change in the not-too-distant future (I haven't started doing any frontend work to support it yet though).

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] PenguinTD@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think a blind trust of such list is kinda dangerous. But a common place where admins and user can tag and rate instances and hosted communities can be a good start.

[–] freeman@lemmy.pub 1 points 1 year ago

Agree. Kinda what I was asking/looking for.

I’m a bit new to running an instance. There seem to be tools created for finding instances and communities. But not something that does the above.

They have lists of blocked and linked instances: https://beehaw.org/instances

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] gh0stcassette@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

There totally are fascist instances though, and I think defederating from those is cool and good. I'm not thrilled about the beehaw defederation either, but I respect the mods' decision, especially since it's targeted only at the two instances with users who were actually causing problems and I can still access beehaw communities from my non lemmy.world accounts

[–] Hotchpotch@beehaw.org 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Some are run or overrun by those kind of people. Have a look at how many instances are already defederated: https://beehaw.org/instances

[–] trachemys@iusearchlinux.fyi 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We sure, I can understand Defederation from “skinheads.social”. I’m more concerned with large instances like lemmy.world who just are rather wide-open. I wonder if large open instances are just bad.

[–] cnnrduncan@beehaw.org 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The Admins here have been pretty open about the fact that they're keen on re-federating with large instances once better moderation tools are available!

[–] ResidualBit@beehaw.org 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That's exactly it. Open signups and the volume that comes with that just highlights the lack of comprehensive moderation tools at the moment, certainly within instances, but also cross-instance - lots of very active conversations happening on this front though!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] prlang@beehaw.org 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

My understanding is that people from Lenny.world can still “use” behaw by subscribing to communities and commenting on posts, but people on Behaw just can’t see them. Is that not how it works?

I have to say I chose behaw because I wanted a more heavily modded experience here. I really don’t mind them shadow banning whole communities if a disproportionate number of trolls are coming over from them. People have got the right to speak, not the right to be heard. The internet’s full of kids just wanting to be obnoxious, and I’ve got to say I’m more then happy that other humans are helping me to filter that junk out

[–] rknuu@beehaw.org 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Unfortunately, defederating means the cord has been cut. This means we still have what was previously been posted, but all future content is bidirectionally blocked.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Cipher@beehaw.org 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

When a Lemmy.World user posts to a Beehaw community right now, it updates the cached community that Lemmy.World stores. Beehaw has defederated with them, so the "source of truth" (hosted by Beehaw) never updates. The source of truth is what updates other federated instances. As a result, someone on startrek.website, for example, will not see posts made by lemmy.world users to beehaw communities. The only people who can see what lemmy.world users post to beehaw right now are other lemmy.world users.

[–] maynarkh@feddit.nl 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Won't that cause a major problem if/when Beehaw would want to refederate, and all that pent up stuff just pours on Beehaw all at once?

[–] Cipher@beehaw.org 7 points 1 year ago

When/if refederation happens, the comments lost to the abyss will stay lost to the abyss. The source of truth will not update based on the past updates of a formerly defederated instance to my understanding

[–] Danar@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 year ago

As far as I understand it (though it may be incorrect) - they won't be synchronized. Content between instances is synced/cached only when the instances are federated, and it doesn't go backwards - only posts after federation will be visible.

[–] Wander@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

Just because this software can be used that way, doesn't mean you're required to use it that way.

If I want to start a lemmy server and not let lemmy.world in, there's nothing wrong with that.

Lemmy.world isn't owed anything, they're not owed to view content in my community, they're not owed that I show their content to my users. And if my users are unhappy with that, that's fine, it's their choice to stay in my enclosed community or not.

Just because we're running the same software and the same communication protocols doesn't change that.

[–] Rakn@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nah. I don’t think it’s an education issue. E.g. I do understand how it works, but see defederation as the nuclear option. As a user in a federated system I don’t care where the communities are hosted that I frequent. As long as it works. That’s the entire point of federation. Otherwise we could just remove federation all together and have everyone create a separate account per instance.

I get where the beehaw admins are coming from and it’s understandable. But it’s not good and chips away at what Lemmy is and could be.

This is one instance now where this happened and I’m not on either of these instances, so I’m unaffected. But if I see more of these defederations (no matter where), the Signal it sends me is that for my needs I likely still have to bet on Reddit and at max this will become an occasional visit.

We are still far away from this point. Just saying. And a normal user can’t be expected to understand it or relate to it. It’s bad UX if they have to. Arguing for them to be educated about it is nice in theory, but misses in reality of how things just are.

[–] Umbrias@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Beehaw admins have no responsibility to "Lemmy as a whole" and to believe so is fundamentally misunderstanding what Lemmy instances are. They have a responsibility to their users to curate the space that they promised.

[–] Rakn@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

That makes sense. I think this also shows a general misunderstanding. Lemmy isn’t and can’t be a replacement for something like Reddit at the end.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Packopus@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

@Cipher I think of it more of an instructional issue specifically rather than learning issue. People explain "it's like email" but fail to deliver the fact that it should be more like "It's how the internet should work". Where people think Lemmy is THE SITE and can communicate with kbin THE SITE.

It should be mentioned that if anyone has built a website, that Lemmy is the software. You install Google Chrome on your computer, you install lemmy on your computer. You are now able to ACCESS all the other websites like you would in Chrome.

People think "oh it's like email, well I know Gmail is pretty good so I'll make an account there. Whatever decisions Google makes is by extension my decision." The average user doesn't know what email actually is. They don't know that you can make your own email service. They don't know you can even just buy a domain and have your own email address.

The only thing that bugs me about the fediverse as a whole is that these threadiverse concepts shouldn't have communities. If it was implemented as intended, you'd have to make a community by making a new instance. The community should be federated, and then duplicate communities would get individually federated or defederated.

I think the ambiguity of the fediverse is muddied by how each software is trying to implement it. And it's almost hard to incentivize making your own instance.

@trachemys

[–] Bardak@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago

People think "oh it's like email, well I know Gmail is pretty good so I'll make an account there. Whatever decisions Google makes is by extension my decision

This is why I think email analogy is very useful to get the basics of how Lemmy/kbin work on a technical level but falls flat on a practical and social level

You have what I would call federation idealists that feel that is should be just like email you should be able to contact anyone. This ignores the fact that email is private communication tool vs a public facing forum.

The argument that instances should be utilities with no "politics" or "culture" just ignores the reality.

[–] hazelnot@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The problem with the idea that each community should be its own instance basically comes down to cost, both financial and time. If I want to make a community about something I'm passionate about I'd have to shell out money I don't have on hosting, buy a domain, learn how to actually host and administrate a Lemmy instance, and then spend like half of my time and energy maintaining it.

Not everyone is a programmer with programmer knowledge making programmer money.

[–] Packopus@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

@hazelnot

Not everyone is a programmer with programmer knowledge making programmer money.

That's true, but then we run back in to the problem of what I saw in early kbin days (before Reddit influx) thinking that there should be many instances all having unlimited communities. But this is basically duplicating communities that are now visible thousands of times. There should at least be a theme/community to each instance and have micro-communities in that.

My example would be current-day forums. There are "instances" for just about everything. Most of the time when I buy a new car/motorcycle I join whatever forum site made for that specific vehicle. So that's what I was thinking when I think it's feasible to make fediverse instances of current sites. Mainly just make federation features the de-facto standard so people can subscribe to their conversations.

I've already seen how Wordpress can federate with a plugin, and every blog post is like any other post. Forums can be similar depending on their backend software the site is running.

@Cipher @trachemys

[–] AnonymousLlama@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

Exactly, at the start of the growth phase for new sites, people want things to look stable. Seeing drama from Z site because Y site disconnected from them can look pretty unappealing

[–] socsa@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

That remains to be seen, doesn't it?