Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mastodon: Add end-to-end encryption API

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 188 posts

Re: Mastodon: Add end-to-end encryption API

#61

Post by simias »

young_unixer wrote: post #33
jack1243star wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole blocking situation turns me away from Mastodon. Short of maintaining my own instance, there's no way to be sure I can follow anyone I'd like to, or communicate with them. There's no way to find out from the outside if an instance is defederated.

I left Mastodon because the big "traditional"/sanctioned instances started banning other instances they didn't like, specifically Gab (instance full of right-wing people that allows basically anything that isn't illegal). I had high hopes for Mastodon but whatever, this whole social network thing isn't worth the trouble. Now HN and Youtube are the only websites I visit for entertainment.

I don't understand this mindset at all. It's not so much "I want to be able to say whatever I want", it's "I want everybody to listen to whatever I say". Go post edgy xenophobic stuff in your dedicated online community if you like it so much but stop acting surprised when other communities want nothing to do with you.

Re: Mastodon: Add end-to-end encryption API

#62

Post by simias »

jack1243star wrote: post #57
vertex-four wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I, as a user, am still going to demand that I can join a community where of likeminded people and moderation so I don't have to deal with the overwhelming spam of the internet myself. That's the bit that a number of decentralisation projects don't get - I don't want to have messages by anyone on the whole internet forced into my view (because have you seen how much that sucks?). I want moderation if the day-to-day us…

Then what is the point of federation? You just described a centralized forum/microblogging server.

The point is flexibility and no lock-in. If you buy into the Twitter platform and eventually you're not happy with the way it goes, moving away has a huge cost. If a federated architecture peers can come and go relatively easily.

See email for instance: if you're unhappy with your current provider you can move to a different one or even roll out a new server and you can still interact with the other users.

Re: Mastodon: Add end-to-end encryption API

#63

Post by jack1243star »

simias wrote: post #62
jack1243star wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then what is the point of federation? You just described a centralized forum/microblogging server.

The point is flexibility and no lock-in. If you buy into the Twitter platform and eventually you're not happy with the way it goes, moving away has a huge cost. If a federated architecture peers can come and go relatively easily. See email for instance: if you're unhappy with your current provider you can move to a different one or even roll out a new server and you can still interact with the other users.

Simply interacting, yes, but email and messaging cannot replace Twitter. What makes Mastodon viable is the identity, multicast and backlog of toots(tweets?), which does not transfer as easily between instances.

Re: Mastodon: Add end-to-end encryption API

#64

Post by jack1243star »

AsyncAwait wrote: post #56
jack1243star wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but I think the implementation of the block is what caused the schism (or simply isolation). It was sad, to have witnessed such a bright future unfold, interesting discussions on language, on tech, on culture. And then to have half of the world just cut off. The fediverse was the future...

You conveniently omit that mastodon.social operates from Germany and thus simply cannot legally federate with many of the Japanese instances.

If you know about this, you should consider that mastodon.social acts as an example instance. This effectively made blocking Pawoo and a few other instances the norm.

There was a block-list circulating around, and if you do not block every instance on the list, your instance is misogynist, pedophile and far-right.

Re: Mastodon: Add end-to-end encryption API

#65

Post by berkes »

cjslep wrote: post #11
sneak wrote: post #2

> specifically the Olm implementation developed by Matrix -- but it should be roughly the same as libsignal I'm all for "many eyes make bugs shallow", but this is somewhat-widely deployed software, and I have approximately 0% confidence (based on my previous experiences with Mastodon releases and code quality) that this will be strong and safe for its first public release. (Happy to be proven wrong, mind you.) Perhap…

> I'd much rather see ActivityPub implementations support good profile deep linking to existing (read: safe) messengers This is something myself and a few others are interested in pursuing.

Everything for this is in place. No changes or features outside of AP are needed.

Mastodon even has a simple key-value table that any profile can enable and fill with details such as "website: example.com", "twitter: @jack" and so on.

This feature already has "verifications". Meaning that you can add proof that example.com, keybase etc are really yours.

This could easily[1] be expanded to verify ownership of SMS, or messenger apps. Provided those apps have some form or authentication/proof in place.

I have this on our roadmap for our "fediverse linkedin" project (another story for another time) so would gladly offer help here; keybase with my contact details in my hn profile.

-- [1] It would be easy after a refactoring. The code handling this in Mastodon is not ugly persé, but rather unfortunate. Tightly coupled to the God-Model "User" (which seems to happen with every rails project at some point) and spread over some json-store, model and unrelated controllers.

Re: Mastodon: Add end-to-end encryption API

#66

Post by boomlinde »

voxelghost wrote: post #40
sgt wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If let's say Stormfront.org wanted to create their own Mastodon instance spreading their thoughts, they'd be free to do so. I'm sure the Mastodon creators wouldn't like it, but they'd have to ideologically support the very idea of allowing them this, as it comes down to free speech.

This is not what free speech is about. Freedom of speech means they are free to publish their opinions, but it doesn't mean that you, or anyone, have to let them publish their opinions on your platform/paper/channel. From the mastodon wikipage: Gab, a controversial social network with a far-right user base, changed its software platform to a fork of Mastodon and became the largest Mastodon node in July 2019.[37] Gab'…

> This is not what free speech is about. Freedom of speech means they are free to publish their opinions, but it doesn't mean that you, or anyone, have to let them publish their opinions on your platform/paper/channel.

In the case of Mastodon, they've deliberately avoided putting themselves in the shoes of a platform/paper/platform owner in the interest of a system where no central authority fully controls its use.

That the creators of Mastodon are "completely opposed to Gab’s project and philosophy" is in no way a departure from that ideology. They're criticizing Gab's use of free speech using their own free speech but have deliberately relinquished their right to exert any more authority than that on an ideological basis. That they can't control it themselves it their unique selling point.

Re: Mastodon: Add end-to-end encryption API

#67

Post by vertex-four »

jack1243star wrote: post #57
vertex-four wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I, as a user, am still going to demand that I can join a community where of likeminded people and moderation so I don't have to deal with the overwhelming spam of the internet myself. That's the bit that a number of decentralisation projects don't get - I don't want to have messages by anyone on the whole internet forced into my view (because have you seen how much that sucks?). I want moderation if the day-to-day us…

Then what is the point of federation? You just described a centralized forum/microblogging server.

I can pick and choose who my community and moderation team is - that's why I am on the fediverse and not Twitter. I am strongly opposed to having extreme right-wing views (along the lines of "you should be dead for who you are") forced into my conversations? I can pick an instance/moderation team which proactively blocks other instances which refuse to moderate their users according to such basic social norms.

Fact of the matter is that I don't really want to talk to most people on the internet, and I don't want to see what they have to say about me every time I want to see what my friends are up to. I want to talk to my friends, maybe have our wider communities able to chime in, and occasionally discover new people through that. It's not my job to convince random assholes on the internet that I deserve to exist, and it's not useful in any way to see their messages. Blocking extremist free speech instances which promote harassment as a normal part of their operation is... a feature, not a bug.

Re: Mastodon: Add end-to-end encryption API

#68

Post by jack1243star »

vertex-four wrote: post #67
jack1243star wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then what is the point of federation? You just described a centralized forum/microblogging server.

I can pick and choose who my community and moderation team is - that's why I am on the fediverse and not Twitter. I am strongly opposed to having extreme right-wing views (along the lines of "you should be dead for who you are") forced into my conversations? I can pick an instance/moderation team which proactively blocks other instances which refuse to moderate their users according to such basic social norms. Fact o…

That is a fair point, but what happens when the moderation team deviates from your beliefs? What happens if your instance is declared not-safe? You're effectively exiled from the fediverse, people you follow will never see your toots again.

Re: Mastodon: Add end-to-end encryption API

#69

Post by progval »

jack1243star wrote: post #68
vertex-four wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can pick and choose who my community and moderation team is - that's why I am on the fediverse and not Twitter. I am strongly opposed to having extreme right-wing views (along the lines of "you should be dead for who you are") forced into my conversations? I can pick an instance/moderation team which proactively blocks other instances which refuse to moderate their users according to such basic social norms. Fact o…

That is a fair point, but what happens when the moderation team deviates from your beliefs? What happens if your instance is declared not-safe? You're effectively exiled from the fediverse, people you follow will never see your toots again.

You can move to another instance.

Re: Mastodon: Add end-to-end encryption API

#70

Post by vertex-four »

jack1243star wrote: post #68
vertex-four wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can pick and choose who my community and moderation team is - that's why I am on the fediverse and not Twitter. I am strongly opposed to having extreme right-wing views (along the lines of "you should be dead for who you are") forced into my conversations? I can pick an instance/moderation team which proactively blocks other instances which refuse to moderate their users according to such basic social norms. Fact o…

That is a fair point, but what happens when the moderation team deviates from your beliefs? What happens if your instance is declared not-safe? You're effectively exiled from the fediverse, people you follow will never see your toots again.

Then I move instance (probably well before my instance is declared not safe, tbh). It's a feature in Mastodon, assuming my moderation team hasn't decided to disable it - basically, I send a protocol message to my followers saying "I'm over here" and they automatically follow me over there. In a future p2p protocol that's designed by people who actually realise that people exist who don't want everyone on the internet to have a direct line to their inbox (aka none of the current ones), I could simply move moderation team and keep my identity.

It's incredibly unlikely that tomorrow, my instance pushes the needle so far that everyone blocks it immediately. More likely a series of changes in the moderation team gradually pushes things that way and I can change instance before things get bad enough that anyone would block it - and I'd do that because it wouldn't be a community I want to be part of any more, rather than any particular fear about being blocked.

Post reply on HN