Notices by Jer Warren (nyquildotorg@fedia.social)

Someone needs to make a "Bluesky is going just fine" page that lists the daily atrocities people are inflicting via public data on its users.

Yesterday everyone was freaking out about the page that shows any user what accounts any other user blocks, now today HuggingFace is distributing an AI training dataset of posts they sucked out of the hose.

Reading the list of domain names included in the InfoWars auction is interesting. Some bonkers stuff in there about Obama slavery and goblins, but there are two that I think the Onion will get good use out of:

wokeyleaks.news
derpstate.news

@mcc @glyph this isn't a defense of anyone or anything, but my understanding was that Bluesky's relay couldn't handle their own PDS load and shut off importing other PDSs while working on stabilizing their system by spinning up a larger relay and staggering traffic onto it. I don't think they were just like "oh shit turn off Bridgy Fed!"

"If you're tired of algorithms deciding what you see, Bluesky might be the relief you're looking for. Like Mastodon, Bluesky has no central algorithm feeding you posts based on some popularity contest. Instead, what you see comes from genuine engagement: posts gain visibility based on how many users like and "re-skeet" them (Bluesky's version of a retweet)."
Tell me you don't know what an algorithm is without telling me you don't know what an algorithm is.

@tim no, all good, I didn't see it as anything other than discussion!

@tim actually, I just realized a potential problem that might prevent it. ActivityPub's privacy permissions are woefully inadequate. There is an account-level permission that says whether I have to approve people from following, and post-level permissions for who is allowed to see them. The post permissions are "only people who follow me" or "only the one person I mention."

My mirrored account would need to be set to "only people I allow can follow me" and the posts would need to be set to "only people who follow me can see them," but the way bridgyfed works is that bridgyfed itself has to follow me. Meaning everything I post does make it into Bluesky's network, and it's up to Bluesky whether they show that content to Bluesky users or not.

Even if there are only two users who are shown the content, the content can still be used for advertising profiling purposes on the users who do see them.

@tim the API does allow it, and there may be tools, but I would have probably implemented the public-to-private ActivityPub mirrorer myself. Still might. Then I would plug tha private copy into bridgyfed because I have no interest in doing that part of the process.

@tim I understand why bridgyfed doesn't have the functionality, and there are really two reasons for it. The first is that the entire concept of bridging a publicly available account to a private one is niche and weird, and the other is the extra logic, UI and resources to handle it would really only be benefitting weirdos like me

I wish bridgyfed had its own privacy controls when bridging content to Bluesky.

I completely get mirroring the privacy settings of the account being bridged, but I'd really like to be able to set the bridge to require approval from followers, because I really only use bridgyfed so that a couple people there can connect with me.

I don't really want what I post here to be discoverable there, because I don't actually want to be publishing there in the first place.

Hm. Maybe I should have made a private activitypub account that mirrors all my posts and use that to bridge to other networks instead. That doesn't solve the problem of replies/interactions, but it does limit participation in someone's for profit business at least a little.

I'm really disinterested in participating in a commercial social media platform, but despite everyone dunking on Bluesky for them not meeting the same definition of "decentralized," I really wish identity and content here on the fediverse worked like it does there. I'm jealous that Bluesky users can host their own content on their own server and domain, even if it is currently only displayed to people by routing it through their centralized servers.

@ireneista @adrienne @Willow when it got taken down it contained two paragraphs of text copied from two publicly available documents, so I can't see how there's any grounds at all for a legal takedown

@ireneista @adrienne @Willow "all it is" is still one person causing a record not to resolve, which is horrifying to me

What kind of fuckery is involved in Matt Mullenweg causing bullenweg.com to no longer resolve, despite WHOIS referencing authoritative domain servers that still return correct information?

Seems like there's some kind of global block involved, and I'd really like to know how that works.

Matt Mullenweg has lost it
"What [WP Engine is] trying to do is ask a judge to curtail my First Amendment rights."

California Cops Show Off Absurd New Cybertruck With Music From Terminator Movies
"While the fully equipped vehicle won’t be used as a patrol car, it can respond to emergencies and assist the community when needed,”
"As long as there's no chance of rain, and provided officers can get the doors open," the statement didn't add.

Have you done ketamine infusions to treat depression and anxiety? It's really expensive, so I'm hoping to hear some actual stories before shelling out the money.

"The Supreme Court justices, who are all older than 50, got a taste of some modern vernacular Monday when Texas Solicitor General Aaron Nielson invoked the expression, “Sir, this is a Wendy’s.” He made the comment while discussing how the state’s law impacts private and public exchanges."

@mattly it's not just you, but some people.have had success with rebooting to get the hover back, for a while.

@thomasfuchs this is not intended as a criticism, but I'm curious how you rectify your desire to keep using the thing those people run with your not wanting to deal with the people who run it?