What’s bad faith about my argument? There’s only two options: You believe what you typed and that it’s impossible to make this mistake, or that you were using hyperbole, and you acknowledge that it is possible to make this mistake. These two options are both mutually exclusive and binary-- there can be no other stances. (and notably you haven’t actually clarified which one you believe.)

I didn’t make you choose to defend a poorly thought out stance. That’s on you.

I appreciate the additional information, however, a link found in the codeberg link you provided leads to this comment from earnest:

The up arrow is the equivalent of a boost on Mastodon, adding to favorites is represented by a star. The down arrow is equivalent to the Dislike button on Lemmy and Friendica, Mastodon probably doesn’t have an equivalent (Dislike will be federated this week). Compared to Lemmy, it works a little differently, as the up arrow there is the equivalent of a favorite.

The comment activity can be checked by expanding the “more” menu and selecting “activity”

This seems to imply that downvotes (reduces) are federated. (And notably, upvotes are now “stars” “boosts” are, uh, “boosts”; this was changed since the linked comment was made)

Or am I totally missing something? That’s always and option.

A fallacy is just pointing out that your argument isn’t likely to arrive at the truth. As I explained, your “I met a dumb person and so all arguments against this are dumb” stance isn’t useful, even if we agree you’re not just making that all up.

I asked for clarification. Is that your stance? That it’s fundamentally impossible that someone could accidentally send a SMS in Signal while thinking it is secured? I’m going to assume that you don’t believe it’s fundamentally impossible, so that mean your real stance is that if that happens and someone gets sent to jail or worse, that’s a small price to pay for your convenience of not having to *checks notes* switch between two apps.

Do you see how your lack of perspective might be leading you to make a poor argument?

I literally was not confined to this thread, which is blatantly obvious if you know how context works.

Making up an argument no one in the discussion has made is called the “Strawman Fallacy”. Why should anyone in this thread care that you talked to someone (allegedly) that was so dense that they made a bad argument that you got frustrated with?

If it’s too hard for some people to pay attention to what they’re doing and use a tool correctly

Ah, so much hyperbole. If I’m successfully stripping all of it away, is seems that your argument is that it is impossible (P=0) to accidentally send an SMS message in Signal, thinking it was a secure message. Is that really your stance? Admittedly, there was a lot of hyperbole so I might have missed the actual point. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

he thought it would be better for the user experience

Is this articulated somewhere because I was under the impression that everything was federated, and this plays right into the point. Why should this be up to the devs? Or, perhaps better worded, what information does the “ActivityPub” label actually tell an end user, right now? Seemingly nothing at all, from a functional standpoint. It’s possible for two ActivityPub-labeled implementations to be completely incompatible, right? Does that sound good for users?

I just can’t think of a devastating real world example.

Why is this your chosen metric? Wouldn’t “this might make the users confused” be a better metric?

The extinguish step is a bit unclear to me.

Once they’re the de facto standard they abandon it altogether and the users, who care little about the nuts and bolts of this, get frustrated and make an account on Threads (using your example).

It’s worth keeping in mind that we’re not talking about normal software. A hypothetical technically perfect solution is still a failure if there isn’t a critical mass of users to make it “social”.

This is not a very thoughtful response.

Last time I checked downvotes in kbin are not federated at all, by design. Lemmy users cannot boost content at all as far as I’m aware, and it’s not holding them back. Developers are completely capable of looking to past implementations and make informed decisions about interoperability in whatever way they see best fit

As I understand it, this is the exact complaint from the blog post. This is great for devs; it’s not great for users. I am referencing this part:

Putting the ActivityPub logo on a project’s website and writing “we support ActivityPub” announcement posts makes technically versed people very happy, and people supporting open standards will read them with shining eyes. However, there is a secondary effect: these announcements carry over something to non-technical users as well. It tells users that this piece of software is compatible with other pieces of software that carry the same logo. But it is not. In another recent discussion, when someone asked me why diaspora* does not support ActivityPub yet, I claimed the project has two options here, which has a direct impact to how we can explain the compatibility with users on other networks:

1. Sorry, Alice, Bob is using software that is not compatible with us, so you can’t communicate with Bob here.
2. Yes, you can communicate with Bob, but since he is using ExampleNet, please be aware that Bob will not receive your photo albums and will be unable to interact with those. Carol will see your photos, though, but unfortunately, she will not be able to see your geo-location updates. Moreover, because of technical limitations, Dan can comment on your posts, but we cannot make sure that Carol and Bob see those, because we cannot redistribute Dan’s comments.

I, perhaps foolishly, assumed that ActivityPub was more structured than it actually is. Though, to be fair, as you point out, this is an older blog post, so there’s some chance that things have improved on that front-- I admit I’m no expert on ActivityPub-- but notably, “there are only a few different implementations, so it’s easy to dig around and make your new implementation compatible” isn’t an improvement. It doesn’t scale. It’s practically begging for the now infamous EEE to happen to it, because whatever is the most popular implementation sort of becomes the standard.

You literally made up an argument no one made in this thread.

The fact of the matter is that it is unwise to have both secure and insecure messaging side-by-side. Depending on where you live, this could translate to a simple mistake resulting in imprisonment or worse. It’s very important that a “secure messaging app” only allow secure messaging.

You, like myself, probably live in an area where accidentally sending a message critical of the government over an insecure message would not have any tangible consequences, so perhaps you’re weighing the convenience as more important due to lack of perspective.

I think the link blog post author’s point isn’t that there can’t be interoperability, only that there’s no standard for that. You have to seek out each implementation and ensure that your implementation interoperates with theirs, on a case by case basis for every implementation.

That’s a pretty specific requirement but luckily you can host your own VPN and access it on your device and then access the service you’re hosting via a local address. So if you do run into this again know that there is a way to circumvent the need to rely on *checks notes* DNS.

I’m kind of curious about how you think the internet works.

The scuttlebutt is that it’s a inside joke by the far-left dev of lemmy to stand for marxist-leninist, but it’s just as likely, if not more, that it was chosen because it’s free.

Keep in mind that most (all?) two-letter TLDs are associated with a country. This includes stuff like .io, .tv, and .me

What would you consider an example of “right wing” speech? In 2023 that usually means bigotry or misinformation, and I can’t help but agree that I don’t see any point in allowing that, but I’m willing to be convinced that there’s more than that.

I think many of us are using reverse proxies, and opening port 443 (https) and maybe port 80 (http).

I am in a similar boat (with Boox) but I set up my old Kindle Paperwhite for my kid just a few weeks ago and that’s when I learned that they finally gave up on mobi.

I don’t know if this is what you meant, but Amazon dropped support for mobi and switched to epub in late 2022, iirc. Not that this means you suddenly should start using Amazon or anything.

It’s a shot in the dark, but are you running a vpn on your phone? That might mess things up.

Manager is the highest. (I think there are only two tiers anyway.)

There is something uniquely wrong with your setup; this is not a general google router issue. Which is good news, you don’t need a new router. The next obvious step (for me) would be to wipe the data for the Home app on the phone and re-set it up. If that doesn’t resolve it, you might consider resetting the router itself to factory, though that could be more annoying.

Port management works on mine for creating forwarded ports. Could it be that you don’t have the proper access to edit these settings?

If it matters, my home app is version 3.2.1.7 (Found under Settings -> Support)

As others have pointed out, this is just a natural-- and arguably desirable– consequence of federation with a reddit-style format. However, I think the problem it causes could be somewhat mitigated by each platform implementing a feature to allow users to group magazines/communities manually-- and share them between instances and (ideally) platforms. Kind of like how Twitter did with “lists”. (I think that’s what they called them.)

I know it’s something of an unpopular opinion around these parts, but I could see this being much more likely if Threads does federate, which I think would be an overal boon to ActivityPub-based instances as a whole.

and honestly, businesses too. There is opportunity here in the business sector, I think.

Steam released an entire Linux OS; I think it’s safe to say that Steam is on-board with Linux gaming in general. Everything has bugs. If you’re just looking for a reason to justify piracy, then fine, but this seems a little out there. What will you do if Lutris releases with a bug that crashes your system? Switch to Windows? haha

Anecdotal statements from people using Threads suggests otherwise.

Well yes. They can still be made more or less easily accessible.

Only on a server by server basis. The data is being transmitted and received. If a server decides to hide that info, that doesn’t necessarily mean that other ActivityPub compatible services will also hide it, let alone services running the same software.

You just need to get used to the idea that a vote is as much a pubic statement as a comment, and act accordingly.

I feel like people read a comment that linked XMPP with EEE and keep parroting it while not understanding it.

XMPP still exists, but people largely don’t want “Instant Messaging” anymore. They don’t want to care about whether the person is online before they can send a message.

Google dropping support for XMPP didn’t do that, it’s what caused them to drop it. They moved on to what people wanted: asynchronous messaging.

This concern about the now overused “EEE” stuff is blown away out of proportion.

Why do you think it will be unmoderated? Keep in mind I have very little exposure to Instagram and less for Threads itself.

You can’t hand wave away the technical limitations like that. If you want downvotes, and you appear to want them, and you want to be on a federated system, and it appears you do, then the federation will require linking downvotes to users.

Downvotes aren’t an outwardly anonymous way to show disagreement like they were used on Reddit. They’re like a comment of disagreement. If someone harasses you for downvotes, report them. And block them. Just as you would if they did so for a comment you left.

I like that voting is public because it makes voting (up or down) a public statement. If I look at a person’s voting history and see upvotes on racist comments and downvotes of well thought out comments I can know with some certainty that I can disregard the opinions of that person. Further, it might make people more thoughtful about what they vote on.

All it takes is one person to spin up one instance.

You never actually showed how it made life easier for trolls and stalkers.

Have you stopped to think about how that works in practice? If I downvote something on kbin (where I am now) and it federates to feddit.nu, how does that work without also knowing my username? As I think I already saw someone point out to you, stripping out that information would make it very easy to send unlimited downvotes to any given instance, because it would just be a counter of downvotes without a user associated with it.

The only reason downvotes were “anonymous” on reddit was because it was closed source and didn’t federate that information to other services. The downvote was still linked to your account, just obscured; Reddit admins could certainly see what you downvoted. This tactic won’t work on any platform that uses ActivityPub, or something similar, without getting rid of downvotes entirely. It’s probably best you get accustomed to this; treat it as you would a comment that says “I think people should see less of this” or something equivalent.

My question was more along the lines of “why do you need to label any given reason as a ‘primary’ argument”. You’ve already been given counter-points.

I think that if you’re concerned about this, you should seek out an instance that both does not federate downvotes and does not display the downvote button. Then you will be unable to downvote, and you won’t see any downvotes from other instances.

I don’t know by what metric I’d even use to quantify that. Why do you need one?

I don’t know that I’d call it the primary argument, just an argument. And containerization makes hosting your own lemmy instance trivial.

Personally, if it makes people a little more judicious about applying a downvote, maybe that’s a good thing.

To what end? So it can get converted into a real currency immediately? I understand (since you spammed it everywhere) that you can donate via crypto, but that’s only because crypto can be converted into a real currency.

Give it up, my friend; fetch isn’t going to happen.

crypto is the beanie babies for this generation. Some people are going to make a lot of money but a vast, vast majority are going to be the proud owners of something worthless that they spent a lot of money on.

I didn’t mind the reddit version when there was only one award and it granted the awardee premium benefits for a month. I felt like that was a good balance. Not that I think lemmy needs that kind of system-- at least not yet.

Trolls know why they’re being downvoted; for reasons I don’t understand, they seem to enjoy it.

You probably shouldn’t be downvoting people having a good-faith discussion, but if you do, the venn diagram of people having a good-faith discussion and unstable enough to harass someone for downvoting them is probably pretty small. Small enough for the block function to mitigate it.

Flip it around. Anonymous downvotes would let anyone spin up a lemmy instance, fill it with sockpuppet accounts, and downvote everything by hundreds or thousands of downvotes, and it would be impossible for users to know the difference.

can’t be a good idea as the site grows and attracts more trolls/unsavoury individuals

Edit: Nevermind, you answered this below.

Is strikeout a thing? Let’s see. Edit2: Nope.

~~I’m curious as to what your actual concern is here. Like, what do you imagine will happen?~~

You expect them not to track purchases through their own app?

You mean through the app?