I love the idea of taking on a monopoly, but I don’t like that, without regulation, it has a low chance of success, and the consumer gets to suffer as the monopoly fights back.

Resume field would get an api endpoint that only returns a json resume, and only if the request header is application/json. And the json resume would have embedded json.

And now the ENTIRE INSTANCE for lululemon, who’s bot posts 1000 times a minute.

If the only criteria to be in a private channel for admins is being an admin, there’s no use making it private. ;) Unless your just looking to filter out bad actors who don’t want to take 5 min and 5$ to make an instance.

FYI for anyone looking to deface more instances, That list is only updated every 24 hours. Depending on when it last run on your home instance, the info could be out of date.

You’re not misunderstanding. They just solve more than one issue, and create a few too.

That’s a personal preference though. You don’t have a need for a relay. There are more than a few people who want to run their own instance and at least browse all the things without having to subscribe to them. This is a news aggregator at the core after all.

I’ve been pondering trying to make one, but it’s not going to be a cake-walk. The tool (that was a script) I wrote ruffled some feathers for it’s potential to destroy the lemmyverse. While I don’t believe that could happen. I’m still interested in something easier and more integrated.

The theory is simple and I am willing to take a stab at it, but there might be road blocks trying to make or incorporate changes to the actual lemmy code.

That, is actually kind of fascinating and may be important info for someone doing a follow-up investigation. If that was the bad actor phishing for moderation access, why would they need that, when they already had an admin account? If it was legit, then it’s super sus. whoever this app developer was needs to have a little light shone on them.

TBF, at least you’re doing something.

You do you. I would tell my users I have no idea what’s going on, and definitely not say “using your open tabs is probably fine.”

I think this carrying on without providing more information is reckless. Does an actual admin from this instance really know what happened or are you just taking a bunch of random commentary and speculation as gospel then telling the users “we’re good.”

People can defederate from an instance for any reason they want, but if I get what you’re trying to say: you think people should defederate from any instance that has a user that subscribes to all of their communities.

I actually wrote it with the flip side of your centralization argument in mind. If a community exists outside of the popular ones a user may never even know of its existence. Having more show up SHOULD be better to prevent centralization no? It requires the users to change their browsing behaviour but at least they don’t have gonsearching offsite.

Yup. 256 GB should be enough database space for anyone though.

I think your idea is on the right track when thinking longer term and assuming the worst case in both design and admin behavior. :)

The whole network needs to be split into “active” and “archive.” New activity (or at the very least stubs to where new activity is happening) needs to be updated regardless of where it occurs without having to capture anything extra.

It increases load during execution. Afterward it’s not significant. My instance is heavily instrumented and monitored. The load this incurs subscribing to 24000 communities is less than adding a single, moderately active user to your instance.

It’s a huge miss if the intended design was to silo information.

What this provides, as far as I’m concerned, is essential to prevent centralization to a few instances.

Is there a better way to do it inherently in Lemmy itself? Probably, and I am excited to help with that!

It increases load during execution. Afterward it’s not significant. My instance is heavily instrumented and monitored. The load this incurs subscribing to 24000 communities is less than adding a single, moderately active user to your instance.

It’s a huge miss if the intended design was to silo information.

What this provides, as far as I’m concerned, is essential to prevent centralization to a few instances.

Is there a better way to do it inherently in Lemmy itself? Probably, and I am excited to help with that!

It doesn’t matter. Most of the work is happening on the instance, regardless of where the script is running.

Thanks! I’m sure you’ll chime in when the lemmyverse falls over because of this irresponsible script.