Pika

Hard agree, if you are trying to actively convince me to click on your link using an alternative front end for YouTube is the greatest way to prevent me from clicking on it in the first place. I’ve had enough experience with them not working that I just don’t bother.

That’s not to say I’m going to click on an actual YouTube link either, but you have a significantly higher chance of me clicking on a YouTube link then one of those alternate front ends that I can’t guarantee safety or stability of.

Just give me the original source and if I wanted to go elsewhere I can go elsewhere.

my router uses openwrt which supports dynamic DNS updating on its own for multiple providers, I currently am through namecheap on it.

what is the benefit of this, it seems like it just adds an automation layer that could fail that might be able to potentially be used as an assistant?

I just create the lxc, and if the package requires docker I begrugendly install docker on the lxc, I’ve never had performance issues with Debian lxc, I use it as my base template and it runs flawlessly (outside of ping not working unless sudo)

That being said, I don’t like installing Docker a billion times and I feel like that defeats the purpose of using an lxc in the first place, so for most small Docker containers I just put them on the same lxc since docker is going to handle all the isolation in those anyway

I don’t ZFS though I still use normal EXT4, and I use PBS for backing it up to an external drive, but I’m curious if that may be the root cause of the issues.

before I read the article, I wholeheartedly disagree with the title.

Self-Hosting not only brings control back into your own hands, but also hones your skills at the same time.

OK so after reading I do agree partially with the regulation aspect, but from a privacy POV all of that is fixed by just not storing PII, I run multiple services in my stack, and the most info I collect on someone is their email, which they defo could just opt out of which I would delete off the system.

As for the cost and labor. It’s really not that difficult, my stack consists of Game servers (a mix of them primarily survival based like ark), email hosting for myself and some friends + no reply services for other internal services, my media stack, my file server, the firewall, a reverse proxy manager and my own programming projects/sites. Honestly the hardest part was the networking aspect of it, learning how to use proxmox was a trip because I hadn’t used a containerized environment before outside of docker.

I think this articles being disingenuous with the no paycheck, there is more to Value than a paycheck. My self hosting while I may not be being paid for it, if I were to put my current setup on to remote hosting I would probably be paying roughly $150 to $200 a month for a private VPS this system allowed me to just spend $700 as a one-off and then minor maintenance costs if something failed, which for a project I intend to keep running regardless its the cheaper option.

As for the ideology of decentralization, yes there is some issues in regards to reliability, obviously these smaller side projects for self hosting aren’t going to have the redundancies that the “proper” hosting is going to have. Like for example just last night my service went down because I lost power for about an hour and a half and my battery standby only had enough power for about 45 minutes of it. Being as most of my stuff is more personal based I’m not too concerned about the downtime but I could definitely see if it was a large scale project like a lemmy server it would be a little more distasteful.

yea this is really their biggest thing here, by the time conf emails get sent everyone will lose interest lol

yea a that was my first thought, no bsky, no lemmy, no mastodon (edit: apperently has limited suppport for exclusively mastodon.social) , like are they paying attention to the trends?

I personally didn’t like mastodon’s UI style, I found it tedious to use and more complicated then needed.

There’s no real similar product(at least out of what I’ve used) so nothing to run muscle memory on, and it deep dived into federation to the point it was confusing too confusing to figure out

this is what I do as well, along with file staging so if I corrupt it by accident I don’t lose the entire DB

Currently I have it on my server as grab only, and then normal access on my clients with staging

The music being removed from your account shit shouldn’t be legal. You paid for it they should be refunding you if they are removing access, in a perfect world anyway.

Assuming the US when I say this but, some year we’ll have consumer protections, I’ll likely be dead by then but hopefully the day will come to light.

That being said I have never heard of soul seek, it sounds like a limewire spinoff? I agree music industry has /sucked/ in terms of obtaining stuff

I’m not really sure why they say that, looking at it the UI looks pretty sleek

This is good news that the instance is back up again. But as an Outsiders pov, I’m going to be super hesitant on wanting to interact with the instance since it’s already proven to be shut down once.

Being said, I love to see people monopolizing on better technology that have more feature sets, and honestly it looks pretty dang cool

If you really don’t want to explain why you are down-voting, I really don’t think people should be down-voting.

there are many times that you can down-vote without a requirement of explaining. Sometimes your point has already been made by another person, other times it’s just a really bad take or the person is so dead-set that honestly you couldn’t change the persons mind even if you explained it. Sometimes the comment is just hostile to the current situation or the OP, sometimes the comment is just super off-topic. Some situations allow for down-votes without explaining it.

I personally down-vote for off-topic and harassing posts as it helps the system sort what is considered helpful to the discussion. I would refuse to down-vote for harassing and off-topic if this system is in place, as it creates an attack vector for the person to come after me, a situation that would require either blocking them or bugging a mod for, which is something that personally I just don’t want to deal with in my life so I would simply just not participate in the vote.

Not sure where you are pulling the “new users get filtered out as untrustworthy”,

The type of system proposed inherently causes it as a side effect. When you have a system that is crowdsourced from the popular opinion, you create an echo chamber that only shows content from sources that have been deemed as appropriate, as such not only do you lose the arguing side, you also lose content from people who are not established/just starting out as they are not profiled as that side. as for examples? Two examples of sites that use that style system include Stackoverflow, which uses a rep system to decide how much access you can get into, and some of the larger reddit sites which went off the karma system to even allow posting in them. There are also other examples in reddit, but the karma block system was the most predominant (followed by sub rule filters which filtered out based off bias).

I do believe that a karma system is best type of system however I believe that the metric should be hidden from sight. This will allow for helpful comments to rise to the top, but will remove the hard focus “score” ideology that everyone has. In this system you wouldn’t know if you were down-voted in the first place, which means you wouldn’t be aware of someone maliciously down-voting you, and it would also do what you want where it would force someone if they had a super big issue with what was posted to actually comment on it. That being said, this system can not exist in a federated environment so therefore the next best thing is either anonymous (to all but mods/admins due to moderation and federation control reasons) or just not having the system as a whole.

the world is an interesting place, the very reasons you gave “for” it is why I was against it. I don’t agree that it won’t cause witch hunts, and from the POV of the commentor it might be nice, but from the POV of the person who is giving the vote, it’s a severe downgrade.

Especially considering the fact that if the person downvoted but didn’t leave a comment afterward they likely would not have downvoted in the first place if it wasn’t anonymous because they don’t want to have to deal with the social interaction of someone trying to push them to explain further. Not everything needs a detailed this is why I feel this way, that’s why there is a upvo and down vote system in the first place, to prevent everyone from leaving a comment of I agree with this / I disagree with this / this is on topic / this is off topic

In addition to this, to say that no one’s giving reasons of why voting should be private, I don’t think that’s a truthful statement there are plenty of reasons that people have provided via privacy, security and sometimes just mental state.

You mentioned that you want to have a system where you choose what people you see and the people you don’t agree with don’t appear., I think that type of environment is extremely unhealthy for a social media platform. It’s why other platforms that have curated that content is starting to become a cesspool. I really don’t want to see lemmy become one big Echo chamber, it’s not healthy to have only one ideology that you see at all times and let’s face it that’s what that system you’re proposing would introduce.

Additionally the system your proposing is going to run into the same issue as the other websites that have attempted to do, this sort of system leads to new people inadvertently getting filtered out as untrustworthy, which will mean that they’re not getting activity on their posts/ comments as well which means that they’re just going to move on to another platform.

Honestly, I think I would rather just have the score system be removed as a whole then see that type of system implemented

they could do similar to another platform had done, which is tie voting to a shadow account that only the instance admin team can link to a user, this allows for moderation while providing the ability for obscurity.

I still disagree it should be public in the first place, but I know it’s a hard requirement for federation so it’s unlikely to become more concealed

I can agree with that, I myself am guilty of blocking people who are hostile with their ideologies, I do believe that would be handy. But I know there is definitely people who are just going to block every person that has to do with their ideology, and giving them the ability to see the downvotes see who disagrees with their ideology I don’t think it is healthy/should be promoted

They aren’t, however that doesn’t mean that because one exists the other should do the same.

My instance while it has the ability to see scores I keep them turned off, I find the score system as a whole to be counterproductive to a healthy environment as it encourages an echo chamber effect. an effect that by making every vote public to the standard person will just become worse as now the people who were voicing their opinion via the downvote/upvote system, will think twice about voicing in the first place. It also removes the people who are non-combative/confrontational from giving an opinion as it links a name to the score. There’s tons of people that would like to give their opinion about things, but don’t want it to be able to be looked up easily, and don’t want to be confronted about that opinion.

If conversations were healthy and always on topic I would fully agree with a public info voting system, but, there is no system in place to prevent someone from getting super pissed off that you downvoted their comment that’s about how they love the color red when the conversation at hand is to do with the financial stability of McDonald’s so they decide to just Branch out and nuclear downvote every other comment you have, or decide to try to harass you in your other comments. Yes you can block them and you can get the instance team involved but that can only go so far especially if the problamic user is part of a different instance, and like you said moderation is already strained so there’s no point in giving even more work to them

The better solution in my opinion, is just keep the barrier in place, and honestly if it had the ability to I would say restrict down what the API provides regarding scores even further, but I’m fairly certain that the way it is due to the need of being able to Federate.

This is actually something I have not thought of, the only issue is that people are going to use it as a I like this instead of this is high quality, which I think is the biggest hindrance of that. This is also going to be nearly impossible to moderate on a federation level because an instance could be spun up that would lie about the reputation of an account and everyone would just go to that instance due to the fact that it doesn’t have that restriction

I mean this is a benefit, I’m just worried that this is going to create a echo chamber, Facebook has the same issue where people just hide post that they don’t agree with which basically makes it so the only content they see is content they agree with and it’s never positive to have only one side of an argument. That’s a big reason of why the US politics system is failing(sorry it’s just the biggest example I can think of) it’s too segregated between the two major parties so nothing can ever get done

I fully agree with this in the terms of removing stuff that doesn’t have to do with the conversation or topic, but I don’t agree on filtering People based off opinion, which is what I’m worried this would cause

So the API does disclose who upvotes and downvotes, however since the major front ends themselves don’t show to everyday users, it’s walled off to finding a frontend that is able to view them and to mod/admins of the instance.

Currently it takes someone to be somewhat savvy to be able to do that, this proposal is making everything public period, which would remove that wall