Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   PC-9801 Enjoyer (pawlicker@bae.st)'s status on Wednesday, 14-Feb-2024 03:16:28 JST PC-9801 Enjoyer
   decided to show some support for the bridge
   image.png
   •  likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Alex Gleason (alex@gleasonator.com)'s status on Wednesday, 14-Feb-2024 03:23:17 JST Alex Gleason

     in reply to
     @Pawlicker I feel like you shouldn't have contributed to the spam. But then what you said was so good, it was worth it. Thank you for your service. 🫡
   • Embed this notice
      (mint@ryona.agency)'s status on Wednesday, 14-Feb-2024 03:25:09 JST 

     in reply to
     @Pawlicker The Higgs1 guy that made the RSA signature request left a thumbs-up reaction, wonder if he's an elaborate troll.
   • Embed this notice
      (mint@ryona.agency)'s status on Wednesday, 14-Feb-2024 05:22:57 JST 

     in reply to

     • :blank:
     • Lexxy 🦊
     @foxxy @i @Pawlicker Not sure if you'll hear it considering I'm one of the biggest personas non grata on your side of the network, but here we go.
     To say you're overreacting would be huge understatement, a good half of your issue is spent on deliberate scenarios you imagined. Scenarios none of which apply to a single bridge instance in any larger capacity than any other server you federate with. Case in point, Alex Gleason's ActivityPub<->Nostr bridge (mostr.pub) has been up for a year at this point with zero opt-out requests received. And literally nothing apocalyptic has happened, nothing that can't be handled via the usual moderation tools at other instance admins disposal.
     ActivityPub is just that, servers sending activities to each other, and unless you maintain some sort of federation whitelist, your automony ends with your server as you can't ever be sure all the 8723 other instances you federated with implement the protocol in the exact same way your homeserver does.
   • Embed this notice
     Lexxy 🦊 (foxxy@social.critter.camp)'s status on Wednesday, 14-Feb-2024 05:22:58 JST Lexxy 🦊

     in reply to

     • 
     • :blank:

     @i @Pawlicker @mint Sorry if I barged in on your issue uninvited, I can remove the thumbs up if you'd like. I'm just genuinely concerned for the safety of all my friends on the fediverse.

   • Embed this notice
     :blank: (i@declin.eu)'s status on Wednesday, 14-Feb-2024 05:22:59 JST :blank:

     in reply to

     • 
     • Lexxy 🦊
     @mint @Pawlicker we can ask them directly @foxxy
   • Embed this notice
     arcanicanis (arcanicanis@were.social)'s status on Wednesday, 14-Feb-2024 06:19:46 JST arcanicanis

     in reply to

     • 
     • :blank:
     • Lexxy 🦊

     https://www.w3.org/TR/activitypub/#block-activity-outbox

     The Block activity is used to indicate that the posting actor does not want another actor (defined in the object property) to be able to interact with objects posted by the actor posting the Block activity.

     In the ActivityPub spec itself, it bears no meaning of access control; it’s purely just to ignore notifications and objects (such as replies) from that actor, as there is no rational way to accomplish limiting access to public posts from specific actors.

     Anything sensitive that requires access control should not be posted publicly on social media to begin with. This isn’t a software design issue, it’s a human behavioral issue.

     I routinely [privately] warn people about oversharing, such as when I stumble across someone posting a photo that gives away the exact location of where they live, or where they work, and most of the time it’s shrugged off as a non-issue, because they assume they have no tangible threats in the present, but never consider the future.

     Then of course, they could always end up in some controversy much later on, over something completely innocuous, and face some tangible threats/risk, but yet put the blame on everyone else for their reckless posting behaviors (“omg doxxing!”). Blocking people they perceive as a threat solves nothing.

      likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Lexxy 🦊 (foxxy@social.critter.camp)'s status on Wednesday, 14-Feb-2024 06:19:47 JST Lexxy 🦊

     in reply to

     • 
     • :blank:

     @Pawlicker @i @mint Likewise u.u... But If BlueSky implemented the ActivityPub spec like whichever server software(s) we're currently using, we'd be able to see all the cool arts and interact with the artists. We'd also be able to de-facto block and moderate other BlueSky users and control, in part, what content of ours they get to see. Bridgy-fed does not do this. BlueSky 100% is technically able implement AP but chooses not to, so they can invent this nonsense drama, and prevent us seeing art.

   • Embed this notice
     PC-9801 Enjoyer (pawlicker@bae.st)'s status on Wednesday, 14-Feb-2024 06:19:48 JST PC-9801 Enjoyer

     in reply to

     • 
     • :blank:
     • Lexxy 🦊
     @foxxy @i @mint There's a lot of artists I want to follow who are on BSky but not Fedi....
   • Embed this notice
     PC-9801 Enjoyer (pawlicker@bae.st)'s status on Wednesday, 14-Feb-2024 06:24:38 JST PC-9801 Enjoyer

     in reply to

     • 
     • arcanicanis
     • :blank:
     • Lexxy 🦊
     @arcanicanis @i @mint @foxxy To add to that, at least one instance software explicitly has a feature where you can reject deletes, and many of them either openly or subtly use this on the entire network.
     https://docs-develop.pleroma.social/backend/configuration/mrf/
     
     And then on top of that, many fedi instance stacks do not "clear" old cached media, so a deleted post can sometimes be seen with the old media intact on one of these instances.
     
     That's not getting into stuff like boardreader scraping one fedi instance a while back and that same instance owner getting clueless FBI agent emails about content hosted on other instances (some instance user made a post that got the user banned on another instance threatening a certain rich American oligarch who runs a company that rhymes with Crack Rock).
      likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     polprog68k (gorplop@pleroma.m68k.church)'s status on Wednesday, 14-Feb-2024 06:32:25 JST polprog68k

     in reply to

     • 
     • arcanicanis
     • :blank:
     • Lexxy 🦊
     @Pawlicker @i @mint @foxxy @arcanicanis the internet would be much nicer if everyone remembered that once you post something online, it's online, and cannot be purged. I once said "think before you post" but it got called victim blaming 🤷♂️
      likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Sprate (sprate@nicecrew.digital)'s status on Wednesday, 14-Feb-2024 06:40:58 JST Sprate

     in reply to

     • 
     • arcanicanis
     • :blank:
     • Lexxy 🦊
     • polprog68k
     >I got in a car accident and went flying through the windshield!!!
     <Were you wearing a seatbelt?
     >STOP VICTIM BLAMING ME!!!!!!!!!!!!
      likes this.
   • Embed this notice
      (mint@ryona.agency)'s status on Wednesday, 14-Feb-2024 06:41:40 JST 

     in reply to

     • arcanicanis
     • Sprate
     • :blank:
     • Lexxy 🦊
     • polprog68k
     @Sprate @Pawlicker @i @gorplop @foxxy @arcanicanis
     photo_2024-02-14_00-40-35.jpg
   • Embed this notice
     xianc78@gameliberty.club's status on Wednesday, 14-Feb-2024 06:47:21 JST xianc78

     in reply to

     • 
     • arcanicanis
     • :blank:
     • Lexxy 🦊
     • polprog68k

     @gorplop @Pawlicker @i @mint @foxxy @arcanicanis That's not entirely true. That assumes that at least one person/server has a backup or screenshot of whatever you post. It's why there is an internet media section of the Lost Media Wiki.

     But yes, people should think before they post.

     https://lostmediawiki.com/Category:Lost_internet_media

      likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     polprog68k (gorplop@pleroma.m68k.church)'s status on Wednesday, 14-Feb-2024 06:51:44 JST polprog68k

     in reply to

     • 
     • xianc78
     • arcanicanis
     • :blank:
     • Lexxy 🦊
     @xianc78 @Pawlicker @i @mint @foxxy @arcanicanis well, yes, i should have said "treat" instead of "remember", I've went through great hoops to find some lost media on the internet myself
      likes this.