this post was submitted on 18 Aug 2024
811 points (97.9% liked)

Fediverse

28712 readers
51 users here now

A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).

If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!

Rules

Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration), Search Lemmy

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Probably better to post in the github issue rather than replying here.

https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/issues/4967

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] systemglitch@lemmy.world 43 points 4 months ago (4 children)

What a horrible fucking idea. You are want this place to be an even bigger echo chamber than it already is? Yes, let's allow the majority of one opinion brigade people's histories to further ostracized them!

Admins, for smart people, can be fucking idiots.

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 23 points 4 months ago (2 children)

This is why they need to make this change, right now theres a false sense of privacy. If I really wanted to see your votes right now, all I need to do is to set up my own instance.

[–] ChexMax@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

That's not necessarily a false sense of privacy if it works. There's an inconvenient barrier to searching vote history and if you do it in the current system you'd be recognized as petty at least. Easing access is not going to make Lemmy better.

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 2 points 4 months ago

I've learned today kbin and mbin exposes it to users too

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

"All you'd need to do is set up an instance" is waaaayyyyyy more work than "all you need to do is click their profile"

[–] SorteKanin@feddit.dk 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

You don't need a whole instance, you just need a user on another service that have votes public, like Mbin.

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I checked and didn't see them there, but maybe I was looking in the wrong place. Not saying they don't exist there. Fwiw, I wouldn't be replying with what I did if people had said something like that instead. I just find it laughable that people suggest setting up a whole instance as if that's a simple thing. Checking from an mbin instance is a much better argument.

[–] SorteKanin@feddit.dk 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I think you may need to be logged in or something, not sure.

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Could be.

Edit: Even after logging in I see the same view.

[–] MerchantsOfMisery@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Is this meant to be reassuring? Because it really isn't at all, and it just seems like you're being dismissive to downplay the issue.

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

No, I just don't see how setting up an entire instance being a good argument. As others have suggested you can check it from mbin right now. I couldn't find it though. If that's the case then my opinion changes.

[–] MerchantsOfMisery@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

So because it's hard for you to access but easier for others, it's not a problem? One user could just publicize the info on a more accessible website.

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 1 points 4 months ago

I don't view it as a problem in the same way I don't view messages not being end to end encrypted as a problem. I assume admins can see everything.

[–] tal@lemmy.today 21 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

The protocol fundamentally exposes them. Absent protocol changes, if someone hasn't already, sooner or later they'll just make a website to look them up.

[–] IlovePizza@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

There are many things that don't happen because nobody does them. Or should we start walking around in a bullet proof vest in case we're shot?

[–] MerchantsOfMisery@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago

We're asking for votes to be private. I think your example is ridiculous.

[–] Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 16 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Votes already are public to all server admins (I can see exactly what you voted for in communities my instance knows about).

[–] index@sh.itjust.works -3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

What a horrible fucking idea.

Do you have a better idea to make it easier to flag bots and government propaganda?

[–] systemglitch@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

It's pretty simple for me. Privacy is a good thing, lack of privacy is a bad thing. Think of the children arguments, which your line of thinking is akin to, is not justification to remove anonymous interactions.