lemmy’s approach still relies on audience targeting for privacy, just like mastodon. using a distinct object type (which is off spec btw) is “more secure” just because nobody else knows what lemmy is doing

it’s not unrealistic to keep trust at the server level. following your rationale, you can’t trust my reply, or any, because any server could modify the content in transit. or hide posts. or make up posts from actors to make them look bad.

if you assume the network is badly behaved, fedi breaks down. it makes no sense to me that everything is taken for granted, except privacy.

servers will deliver, not modify, not make up stuff, not dos stuff, not spam you, but apparently obviously will leak your content?

fedi models trust at the server level, not user. i dont need to trust you, i need to trust just your server admin, and if i dont i defederate

good reply but private items are not “quite literally blasted out to anyone who listens”, AP spec has audience targeting and content gets sent capillarly, like email. a Note for bob gets sent ONLY to bob’s server

as:Public content gets broadcasted by some software (relays) and inbox forwarded by others (mastodon, mitra).

linking barely relevant threads is a bit annoying

your complaints on “unlisted vs public” are completely unrelated to the issue at hand

your analysis that relates to this pixelfed flaw is just:

Privacy Enforcement:

• No explicit requirements for how receiving servers should restrict visibility based on audience fields
• No requirements that servers must hide content from non-addressed users

these aren’t good analyses: content should be private by default, nowhere is stated otherwise. if you feel like this common sense practice is somewhat arbitrary, it’s actually mandated by GDPR and more data protection laws.

if you want to rule lawyer that “acktually spec doesnt EXPLICITLY say that you cant show stuff meant for alice to bob if bob asks” and ignore this web good practice (probably implied by the many privacy remarks in the spec but let’s ignore those) which is actually mandated by governments, feel free to still ignore the incompetence displayed by dansup in implementing something that every other fedi software managed, go for it

even if you were right, even if the spec was really that vague, even if it wasn’t a good practice and requirement, in a federation parties cooperate. pixelfed breaking a common agreement is defederation worthy, and dansup remains either incompetent for implementing badly something easy or toxic for federating ignoring what the federation requires

you’re still not addressing the point, just linking other posts back and forth and moving the goalpost

audience targeting is NOT a new abstraction by mastodon, it’s part of ActivitySTREAMS, not even ActivityPUB

rtfm and do NOT give a rest to bad behaving software

how is it a failure of mastodon that pixelfed doesn’t respect audience targeting? it’s not like it’s something that mastodon made up, this isn’t about unlisted/public

variety of made up reasons

you are not engaging with the argument, just stating ideals

fedi developers should get paid? yes, look at gts and mastodon

fedi devs should also be held accountable of their fumbles

dansup showed quite some incompetence in handling security, delivering features, communicating clearly and honestly and treating properly third party devs

it’s fair for one person to not be able to handle a big software with big instance and big usercount. mastodon has a legal entity and a team, gts has no flagship instance, is aggressively open source and gathered a lot of contributors, dansup is winging it alone and failing

let’s just make a big fixed point of failure of dansup, what could go wrong … ?

check out mitra too, could probably use some funding because it’s transparent and delivers rather than promising the moon and delivering CVEs (but with a grant AND a kickstarter, maybe pay some other devs???)

like there are thousands of fedi projects, give 10 bucks to the little dev doing it for fun in their bedroom, more money will not make dansup more competent

periodic reminder to not touch dansup software and to move away from pixelfed and loops

dansup is not competent and quite problematic and it’s not even over

developers with less funding (even 0) contributed way more to fedi, they’re just less vocal

dansup is all bark no bite, stop falling for it

receiving posts is trivial but you need to convince others to send it to you. i can’t just set up a malicious instance and get your private posts, i need to convince you to send them to me, and once convinced i can use any normal software to access it, no malicious custom thing needed. literally just follow me from a mastodon.social throwaway and you get my followers-only posts. content addressing is great on fedi and your instance sends your private posts exactly to who you want and noone else. pixelfed receives a private posts and shows it to third parties, its not the system’s fault.

fedi is not great for sexting because your pics just sit in clear on your server admin’s machine and all dms are easily searchable on db, it’s a whole other issue

email works the same way. it’s impossible to implement private emails? if you cc your email to im.going.to@leak.it and it leaks, would it be fair to complain about the whole email system?

e: should have read deeper first its already been said

this is wrong, you’re assuming incorrectly. private posts get sent to only intended recipients. pixelfed allows other recipients on the same server to read that. it’s not your instance software, it’s pixelfed, please dont spread misinformation based on uninformed assumptions

if you deliver a letter to your cousin, and they leak it to all their friends, is it the post system’s fault? instances federate by default, but private posts require actual intention. if i make a private post, explicitly mark it as private, deliver it to your instance and then your instance leaks it, i’d blame the instance, not the system. even signal can leak if you send your stuff to unintended parties.

someone can create a rogue instance

you shouldn’t send private stuff to unreliable parties. big software and big instances have a reputation, and it’s constantly up to you whether sending them something or not. when @sus@totally.legit follows you, check where they’re from. if you just accept follows left and right, are your followers-only posts really private? and if you direct message someone on some sketchy instance, you still need to trust them to respect your privacy. it’s the same on signal, e2ee doesn’t make a difference

this is why i completely blame pixelfed here: it breaks trust in transit and that’s unacceptable because it makes the system untrustworthy. you can get followed by sketchy people on mastodon.social and they will only see what you send them. in this case, other people can see what you post, regardless of you sending it to them or not, and regardless of the target leaking it or not

“Can someone try and poke holes in this idea?”

you are still proposing a federate ad network. payments are left to crypto (not fedi), credit cards (not fedi) or paypal (not fedi). the shipping is done by shops themselves (not fedi) (also amazon handles ~80% of their deliveries, check in this thread for sources). What’s a “main shop”? doesn’t sound very decentralized. you suggest leaving contestation again to the shops to handle (not fedi).

what exactly are you fediversing here? the proposition to users would basically be a single view with all shops, but then just delegating to them? there can be value in this, i see it mostly as an ad network leveraging AP and I’m really not a fan. it isn’t really amazon

being angered by being shown issues in your idea doesn’t help your idea. go visit your local hackerspace and start building if you think we’re just naysayers

you are not proposing a federated amazon, this is just federated ads and/or reviews.

how to process payments? how to ship goods? how to handle refunds? how to handle contestations?

please you can’t just make anything federated. this protocol is built for social media and struggles to take over that sphere, we should focus on one thing rather than throwing random stuff at the wall hoping it sticks (cough federated tik tok cough)

this is an icky issue because lemmy sends votes with empty addressing, so remote instances should count them but not show them to anyone. however mastodon (and *key) sends likes with empty addressing too, but considers them public. lemmy is (surprisingly) right here and should request that the rest of fedi respects the protocol and hides stuff based on its addressing. maybe open issues on mastodon and friendica

also this issue probably exists when seeing lemmy posts on any microblogging instance

I would be SoL if I didn’t have one of my original sessions upon making the account years ago still

key backups are a thing: element tries to make you save the recovery phrase. if you lost your recovery phrase and all sessions, you can still rotate keys and recover the account, just no encrypted history. it seems you’re not familiar with matrix, not that the system is flawed

99% of rooms aren’t encrypted so are completely and totally insecure anyway

if this is true, you wouldn’t even be SoL if you lost your session: just rotate keys. very big rooms are unencrypted: what value does e2ee provide when the other end is 10k+ people? any of these may ne untrustworthy, you’re just paying extra infra cost. also, if 99% of your rooms are unencrypted, how do you keep seeing encryption issues?

these statements seem excessively dramatic and in opposition with each other

you mention neochat and fluffychat. i explicitly said element, and element x on mobile

im rather upset at the fact that we have basically no choice: dendrite is getting left behind, construct is abandoned, conduit is weird and conduwuit is not super reassuring. on the clientside, fluffy mostly works but uses old crypto, cinny is slow and lacks a ton of stuff, nheko is a mess, fractal is really underfeatured and i don’t even know what neochat is. using matrix basically boils down to “synapse+element(x)” or “lmao have fun fixing stuff”

it seems from your replies you lack understanding of how things work and are nonetheless choosing community clients rather than the stuff element does. super valid, i encourage you to do so, just maybe cast your judgment on the actual stuff you’re using and not the whole project itself

i’d like to close saying that your anectodal experience is not of much value here: you are having issues? i’m not, and neither is all those i’m communicating with. what gives? it’s instead observable that newer developments address the issues you’re mentioning: transparent encryption and simplified sliding sync

element is entitled, ignoring feedback and constantly playing the victim. its practices with the protocol are despicable.

the protocol, however, works

while “Could not decrypt message” is the n1 meme for matrix, i haven’t seen it happen in a long while, maybe a year. synapse and element x are quite good at this point, you should try matrix again

im not an element fan, company is a bit spoiled and sassy, but they stopped adding features and went all in on polishing recently. fair, as they’re trying to sell themselves for national deploys

honestly hashtags is 100% lemmy’s fault: groups/communities are “audience” AP field, lemmy some time ago aiming to be “more compatible with mastodon” made it so that posts in communities get automatically added an hashtag, and hashtags get sent into communities. this is honestly stupid and should be undone, you’d better aim your anger at lemmy devs.

regarding mentions, Twitter-like software needs them for addressing: lemmy implies that replies are addressed to replied-to user, other software doesn’t (you may want to contribute to a conversation without mentioning user directly above). if they don’t mention, you don’t see it, you’ll have to just deal with this. you could cook yourself a client that finds mentions in object “tag” and removes them from the body itself if you care this much

you’re right, my initial reply was harsh, i wish i had waited a bit longer before replying. i hope my points won’t get lost in the rant because i stand by them. i really wish this enthusiasm was spent on other hurdles rather than chasing big monoliths. i don’t want to curb enthusiasm, just move it elsewhere

So let me get this straight. Are you really saying “we the developers are going to build this however we see fit, and you the user can go fuck yourself, or else learn how to code and build it yourself”?

you’re putting it in rather extreme terms, but yes. even if you were completely right in your opinions, the person investing their free time to do work and sharing freely the result is entitled to work as greatly or badly as they like

Don’t like the feedback? Great, feel free to ignore it, or tell me why I’m wrong

honestly yes I’m doing exactly this: I’m ignoring your suggestion and telling you why i think you’re wrong. i also shared some of my reasoning behind which i think is still valid, and i will reiterate it

This alternative has existed for a long time, but still has a fraction of the users as other alternatives out there. Aren’t you at least curious as to why that is?

not at all because i know a good reason for it: fediverse doesn’t scale well if expected to replicate fully and be a “central plaza”. every server owning every post from billions of users is a very prohibitive design, especially if you expect self-hosters funded by their wallet or donations

i really think we should try to change how we do social media, not make the same thing again. if you just want that, atproto is likely more fitting, AP is decentralized, not distributed! things like nomadic identity would make the “server issue” obsolete. replies collections permit on-demand fetching of replies. activity signing and forwarding could provide real network-wide broadcasts

if we’re cooking ramen, we appreciate knowing if it’s too salty or bland. coming to complain about ramen not tasting like burgers, and proposing to add some ketchup, is useless at best, a bit disrespectful at worst