rglullis

Perhaps knowing just a bit of xpath would solve your problem?

They seem to be working normally. Check if your instance admin blocked them?

Interesting that you didn't argue against "not really being against Surveillance Capitalism", but instead chose to use your presence on Lemmy as if that was enough reason to dismiss what I said.

Anyway, you said it yourself: if people are okay of having two online personas, one for the "acceptable in public" and other for the "things to be done in private", why couldn't that be case here, and your presence on Lemmy is just a decoy "for public messaging" and to keep trying to convince people that no one should be looking any further than that?

I think I get your point, but I surely don't agree with it. Honestly, it seems that you are not really interested in dismantling Surveillance Capitalism, just afraid that "Big Fedi" will attract the attention of too many people, and ending bringing scrutiny to some marginalized groups you care about.

To put it less nicer words, you are not really concerned about privacy or Surveillance Capitalism, you are just worried about losing your echo chamber.

Your whole wordlview is hinging on two conflicting realities:

• social networking is an inherently public activity, and this is the way that the majority of people want it to be.
• the only way to be free from surveillance capitalism is by having private communications, and while this is something that affects everyone, only a minority of people seem to be actively opposed to it.

The "consent-based" social media does not work well for a small business owner who wants to promote their place to their local community, or the artisan that wants to put up a gallery with their work online. They want to be found.

If you tell them that they have to choose between (a) a social network that makes it easier for them to reach their communities or (b) a niche network that is only used by a handful of people who keeps putting barriers for any kind of contact; which one do you think they will choose?

What your recent articles are trying to do is (basically) try to shove the idea that the majority should change their behavior and completely reject a public internet. You are basically saying that the "social" networks should be "anti-"social in nature. This is, quite honestly, borderline totalitarian.

But that’s not feasible for broad data harvesting by Meta.

Why? You keep writing about how evil Meta is and their infinite amount of resources. If you really believe that, why do you think they would stop at the mere wall of "federation consent"?

So if your comment hasn’t been sent out out to other instances, they don’t have it.

What's stopping malicious actors to create an account on the same instance as you and follow you (or your RSS feed) exclusively to pull your data?

Remember "information wants to be free"? That adage works both ways. If people want (or need) real privacy, they need to be equipped with tools that actually guarantee that their communication is only accessible to those intended to. The "ActivityPub" Fediverse is not it. They will be better off by using private Matrix (or XMPP rooms) with actual end-to-end encryption.

You are not getting interest from the community because you jumped into coding before even checking how the business would work. I'm all for experimenting and trying things out in practice before overthinking and over-designing, but in this case it would definitely help you if you did some dogfodding and ran an instance for yourself before offering for others.

So your idea is to oversubscribe your servers with the expectation that no one will notice?

Not only this is a disgusting practice, it won't happen at the scale you'd need. Hosting fediverse applications are not like hosting low traffic blog sites, even instances with a few daily active users will require 1-2 gigs of RAM and tens of gigs of storage.

$2/month per instance? That won't even cover your server costs at the cheapest provider that you can't think off. What about storage? Taxes? Payment processor fees? Your labor?

Unless there is some thing inherent to how Rust runs tests, the test script seems be mostly integration tests exercising the API. There does not seem to be unit tests which would be the first thing you'd need to have to test like the function that seems to be the source of the bug. (Hint, if your test suite needs to have a running db, you are not unit testing.)

As for OAuth vs LDAP: both could be used as part of a Single Sign-On solution, but the actual use cases are completely different. Having LDAP authentication would allow, e.g., to let users authenticate to Lemmy using an intranet account or (in the case of Communick) customers could use the same credentials for their Mastodon or Matrix accounts.

Reddit is not exactly the same culture as lemmy.

True but I'd argue that, once you start looking into the more niche subreddits, there is no single culture within Reddit itself, and these thousands of smaller niches are the really important ones and could've helped with the migration.

Yeah, my bad. Two-way communication has shown to be a bit tricky to be done properly. It will require either keys for users or for the answer to be sent as a DM