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

Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters

bsky.social

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 471 posts

Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters

#391

Post by hnbad »

numpad0 wrote: post #314
hnbad wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Communities are built on shared values and expectations of what is or isn't acceptable conduct. If a guest to your club house starts pooping on the carpet, you throw them out not only because you don't want that to happen in your club house but also because throwing them out demonstrates to the other people in your club house that they can expect there to be actual consequences to that kind of behavior, allowing them…

wtf. The problem with censorship is censors are subservient to his nation and don't get to pick victims at his will? "demonstrates ... that they can expect there to be actual consequences" ? You really must hate the concept of a modern nation and social contract. Post 18th century world started with peasants beheading kings and gutting his body into pieces so no single individual shall have any meaningful parts of it…

Sure, telling people who openly advocate for the death of people in your group to take their opinions elsewhere is exactly like peasants beheading kings or kings throwing people they didn't like into the pit. I'm not even sure how to begin responding to such a creative interpretation of what I said.

Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters

#393

Post by fodkodrasz »

pr337h4m wrote: post #223
Repulsion9513 wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DMs on any other service also have no privacy. Signal or Telegram could read your DMs by simply releasing an update to their code, for example. You always have to trust the person running the service you use. (Unless you have E2EE/something like OTR, in which case you have to trust the persom who makes that code!)

The whole point of end-to-end encryption is that you don't have to trust the people running the service you use. If Signal releases a malicious update (and they don't provide reproducible builds), it is very much possible for you to know about it, as everything is on your device. Even if the binaries are different from the source code, decompilers, analyzing network traffic, etc. gives the community a good chance at…

Just make ci releases with daily updates. Good luck reverse engineering and auditing that.

If the protocol is not open, you have to rely in the clients provided by the vendor, and you can slip a backdoor throigh easily.

When did you last audit your Signal client? Where is “the commjnity” organizing this effort and publishing the results?

Debian shipped an entropy lowering in house patch despite the “many eyeballs” fos years (for OpenSSL). Don’t lure yourself into false feeling of security bevause of the “community” might be doing something. Only count on defenses surely in place, with traceable operation and output history, with responsibles who are allocated resources for the work and having stakes at its outcomes.

Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters

#394

Post by CaptainFever »

KerrAvon wrote: post #379
jakebsky wrote: post #5

Hey HN, the engineering team at Bluesky is especially excited to get to this point! We're happy to help answer questions and help anyone trying to run their own PDS host. Things should work pretty well for self-hosters right now, but we're standing by to help if there are any problems. Technical details and the installer are in the GitHub repo https://github.com/bluesky-social/pds And we're on Discord available to he…

[flagged]

This is incredibly rude, irrelevant (I could not find your claim anywhere in the article posted) and not the way to behave on Hacker News. "Be kind. Don't be snarky." Please be better.

Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters

#395

Post by Arnt »

kstrauser wrote: post #215
Repulsion9513 wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Public is public. And someone else will just go build an opt-out (or maybe even no opt-out!) bridge.

Nah. Consent is a thing and this wasn't consensual. Yes, the posts were publicly accessible, but the intent of posting to Mastodon isn't to have it show up automatically on another network. It's technically possible, yes. It's still a dick thing to do and it pissed people off. And again, it wasn't about Bluesky in particular. If Google announced that they were going to ingest all Mastodon content and post it in a new…

What thing is consent?

Mastodon is an odd sort of network, there's more blocking than I expected and it somehow seems as if blocking is an intrinsic part of the design. In Mastodon, blocking looks like a choice one makes for whatever reasons, not an unloved measure needed for fighting abuse.

As if the design doesn't tell users "you can follow people in the fediverse" but rather "your ability to follow people in the fediverse is limited by you and three other parties and the software isn't among the three".

So… if the mastodonish idea of consent doesn't extend to all of the fediverse, what makes bluesky different from some unvetted mastodon site run by weird people? If the poster's/follower's/would-be follower's consent isn't taken for granted in one case and isn't taken for granted in the other, what makes the two cases different? There obviously is a technical difference, but what is the difference wrt. consent?

Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters

#397

Post by vidarh »

steveklabnik wrote: post #229
vidarh wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only in the strictest sense and if you assume nobody will build graphs of interactions to use to block instead.

Sure, I was assuming "within the context of the protocol," because if we're willing to step out of that, then literally anything can happen.

It's a fairly safe assumption in this instance given how important these features are for people - either BlueSky will never get much traction, or people will add ways to achieve the same result.

Personally, I'm not very block-happy, but I still have a few instance-wide blocks in place for my even my single-person instance on Mastodon because there are literally a few instances full of nazis, run by nazis, where blocking one puts you at risk of brigading.

I'm in a privileged enough position to have relatively little to worry about, but this also extends to a safety issue for a lot of communities, where harassment and threats spill over into the "real world", and where being able to put in place broad, expansive blocks to minimize the ability for individuals who consider themselves "wronged" by one of their victims to utilize their communities to strike is the bare minimum when there isn't a central authority putting efforts into getting rid of these users.

Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters

#398

Post by vidarh »

GordonS wrote: post #253
vidarh wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's funny given the number of people explicitly expressing support for fascism I've blocked on my Twitter account over the last week.

I think the reality is that it's a mix - but people tend to follow others with similar views.

The problem with that is that Twitter defaults to showing you their idea of what you should see, not who you follow, and they clearly optimize for "engagement", not what you like, and hate drives engagement.

Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters

#399

Post by sureglymop »

kouru225 wrote: post #137
sergiotapia wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Twitter is a conservative cesspool I disagree. If anything now it's more balanced, every "right of Portland-liberal" is no longer hidden and shadow-banned or worse. I like it a lot more! Now you can actually read and learn about stuff you care about.

Navalny’s wife was just banned and then shadow banned. There are countless examples of leftist accounts getting banned just for being critical about Musk. It’s absolutely conservative cesspool. Nazis can are literally posting 14 words propaganda all day long and there are no consequences.

To think that Navalny or his wife are in any way leftists is insane. They were leaning more towards nationalism (just for Russia instead of the US).

In the face of current events though, that can be overlooked as it is not a narrative that serves western interest.

But to give an anecdote about an alternative, I rarely see any bigotry on Mastodon. Instances which allow that or don't moderate it correctly get block listed by instances I like. These instances may defederate into their own bubble in which they can still exist but cause no harm to the general timeline. Yet everyone still remains the freedom to express themselves. I like this because it's just a natural way of how to solve this problem for the end user.

Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters

#400

Post by Lutger »

charcircuit wrote: post #275
jakebsky wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for Caddy, Matt! Some of us on the team have been using Caddy for years, for many of our projects. Because it's so simple, sufficiently high performance, and has lots of nice features. The on-demand TLS certificates with an "ask" endpoint is especially useful for the PDS use-case. Because there's generally a wildcard DNS name that is used to give each new user a domain handle (@alice.example.com) but we don't…

Even if it may be simple in some areas, it doesn't handle edge cases such as https://github.com/caddyserver/caddy/issues/1632 in other areas out of the box unlike other server software.

That is a bit unfair, as it is intentionally not doing so. You may disagree with it, sure, but as it stands I think your comment implies oversight or immaturity, which is evidently not the case reading the discussion on the issue you linked.
Post reply on HN