If you can self host, do it. Definitely worth having the freedom over your own server and not having to worry about what someone else decides you can or can't see
this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2023
47 points (96.1% liked)
Lemmy
12557 readers
1 users here now
Everything about Lemmy; bugs, gripes, praises, and advocacy.
For discussion about the lemmy.ml instance, go to [email protected].
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
Federation is one sided?
You can still be defederated by another instance, but most likely they won't care unless you go out of your way to harass their users or create a bot farm.
Well given the shitstorm around shitjustworks just because of c/thedonald... Lemmy instance mods are no different to Reddit mods lol
Yea was considering it. Already have a server where I self host a lot of things for my own use. Just concerned about security, as my server isn't reachable via the internet (so security has been a bit "loose" so far since it doesn't really matter) and I would have to open a port for this.
Also opens a few privacy issues. Either I use my existing domain which would expose my dns records and SSL cert history to anyone who wants to know or just buy a new domain just for Lemmy. Even still through, my IP would be permanently attached to the server which would be public for anyone wanting to follow up my instance. I could try and host it behind a VPN that allows port forwarding, but just adding more complexity and cost the setup..
Could also just buy a cheap VPS and just use that for just the Lemmy instance so I wouldn't need a VPN. Just feels like it would go a little bit against the self hosting spirit since I actually have my own hardware to do so..
You could host on Oracle free tier. I use an ARM free instance, which is plenty for me. And you can always scale or move somewhere else if you'd have many more users.
Could also just buy a cheap VPS and just use that for just the Lemmy instance so I wouldn’t need a VPN
You can rent a VPS and host VPN on it
until beehaw defederate your own instance
That is also another concern of mine for self hosting. I know the fediverse is facing a massive bot problem right now and some suggestions of doing whitelists or blacklists to help combat this, so having my own private instance could even be a worse move in the near future.
Yeah, hosting your own Lemmy instance will quickly turn into the equivalent of running your own mail server. It's just not something you want to deal with because you'll spend hours dealing with blacklists, spam, government requests and other BS.
I'm sure things will stabilise and servers will emerge that get the balance between moderation, federation and uptime right, and then you can migrate to their instance and set up a recurring donation to pay for what it would cost you to run your own server.
That depends. I think a one user instance as jumping point to the fediverse won't be too much hassle.
It’s just not something you want to deal with because you’ll spend hours dealing with blacklists, spam, government requests and other BS.
What should I do to get all these? Am I hosting my mail server in a wrong way?
So you're running a mail server and you never had any issues with delivery because your IP address ended up in a blacklist?
I think it was in UCEPROTECT-Level2 or UCEPROTECT-Level3 a couple of times, but it wasn't an issue because these are a subnet and ASN level blacklists that offer paid "whitelisting", so no sane person uses these abominations anyway. My emails can sometimes end up in a Spam folder for whatever reason, but I don't recall ever having them completely bounced.
If they would go as far as to defederate with your specific instance, you should seriously reconsider whether their instance or their community actually have any value to you
I'm more concerned about whitelists where I need to apply for federation with the big players or some sort of automated bot solution that may inadvertently blacklist small, legitimate servers.
Then we need enough communities and users outside of big player instances. The power is in our own hands.
Also, if they still do implement whitelists and make an application process more than just asking nicely, refer to my previous comment.
Even in the most safe space-y parts of Mastodon (which has way more experience with trolls & assholes than Lemmy just by existing for longer), single user instances don't get defederated without reason. So I'd be more in favor of reflecting inwards and wondering if there is a specific reason why they defed'd me.
Defederating just for the sake of defederating is, of course, something extraordinary. But having a reason to defederate != having legitimate reason to defederate. After all, instance admins are not almighty gods with infallible moral compasses, they are just humans.
Defederation is simultaneously very useful and very dangerous.
Large instances have the power to kill smaller ones by defederating them, since they control an overwhelming share of Fediverse content. That is a lot of power in the hands of a small group of people, each potentially with their own views and agendas.
I think defederation should be reserved for openly malicious servers and used as an absolute last resort. Think of the Internet and how horrible it would be if countries decided to just disconnect from other countries based on conflicting ideologies.
The vast majority of users on legitimate instances just want to explore interesting things, share some thoughts and have a good time. Defederating hurts legitimate users the most, trolls can easily hop instances and find another way to troll.
Identities should be federated and not local to instances.
Long time Fedi user, first time Lemmy user here.
Defederation is one of the reasons society is so fractured now. We can't talk to our enemies, so we can't bring them round with compassion and logic. We just cut them out and they spiral into a more hateful and extreme version of themselves.
Obligatory post:
Yes and no. Society has always been fractured in ways that limit discourse. Prisons, psychiatric institutes, universities, bourgeoisie, NCO/CO, private dwellings, municipailities, nation states. So a bit of separation is okay.
Arguably the digital space magnifies this effect. And fair enough. But then I would argue:
The internet is already defederated by default. Extremists already congregate on forums that are completely isolated. Facebook users are walled off from YouTube users, etc.
The Fediverse doesn't exacerbate the separation that already exists. The opposite is true. The Fediverse is the one technology that is providing technical means for interconnection across groups.
First of all, good conversation. I'm enjoying it.
I've been around almost five decades, and I can say without a doubt that yes, there are and have always been divisions in society, but not this segregation into hate camps that exists now. Not on this scale - previously, only extremists would be so disconnected from society. Now, we drive them into their safe spaces.
Even milquetoast blue and red flag wavers are shooting each other regularly where before there would be some mild eye-rolling, and this coincided with the rise of social media, which, as you say, has always been segregated.
Understanding and moderation comes with only one thing - compassionate discourse. You can't do that if you block ban entire segments of the community.
Did you read the article I linked? What are your thoughts?
A counter. You can still talk to beehaw people. Apart from whatever other media they’re on, such as matrix or mastodon, you can create an account there to start a conversation about re-federating, no problem.
Defederation doesn’t completely cut people off from each, or create crazy prejudices about what’s happening on the other side. This isn’t real life, it’s just accounts in servers.
What it does do is allow people to take some control over their social spaces. It’s a new thing compared to big corp social media, and we almost certainly have done learning on how to do it better, but it does create a social dynamic online closer to real life, where being active about your social space rather than passively subjected to anything is the norm.
Don’t get me wrong, defederstion can be done badly and rashly. But I would push back on any perspective that would erase or ignore the genuinely social aspect of controlling who and what you associate with, especially online where things are so much more plastic and connected.
Compared to what big corp social media has made us think, we don’t all need to be connected to everyone. In fact we never were … it was a profiteering fantasy. Instead we can embrace the choices and freedoms people have here while also trying to build better bridges. That’s what I’d do in real life anyway.
So I see where you're coming from, and it's a valid point.
There's a but here though.
Point 1: Corpo soshuls don't connect you to everyone. They have very specific rules that they abuse to ban people with inconvenient (and admittedly sometimes schizophrenic) beliefs.
Point 2: As a user, you can block somebody (or should be able to block) anyone you find distasteful or upsetting. why would you want someone else to make that decision for you by blocking a whole instance? Don't you want that control?
RE 1 ... "everyone" was meant figuratively. Any big social platform had lots of people all in one space, almost certainly more than ever were before. And of course their interests were in provided that "convenience" and reaping the "engagement" that ensued. Even if their banning practices were questionable, by the numbers, regarding people's natural tendency to form groups and networks, the size of big social platforms was surely significant!?
RE 2 ... Control is nice! And we have a good amount here (I can block you and this community if I wish). But control is also work, right? At some point the work could become too much. And for those susceptible to being targeted by abuse and bad faith actors, it often can be. So deferring control to a group action level also makes sense and is also nice, especially if we have control over which groups we belong to (getting back to "accounts on servers").
Generally I'm with you on a personal level. But I also know I'm pretty capable of tolerating some of the most vile shit the internet has to offer, and am privileged enough that little of it will be personal to me and my qualities. I also believe that avoiding defederation is an objectively good thing to do.
But you can't tell people how to feel about things or to change their life history or how they're seen by some shitheads ... and the best thing we can do, I believe, is be somewhat accepting of the chaos and the value of the right of association, and, be good citizens by building bridges as best we can.
If it were a common workable thing then Daryl wouldn't be the literal sole case people like you tote around
I don't tote anyone around. I just got here. My experience is from Mastodon - I have some good friends on shithole servers - granted it's like 2% of the server and the rest are fuckwits, but I'm glad I know them and have the power to block the rest.
"People like you", and I mean people with your argument that you can out-talk people from their ignorance. It doesn't work for the internet and it's exactly what they want. See: Alt-right playbook youtube series.
How do you engage the alt-right?
Dont: https://youtu.be/4xGawJIseNY?list=PLJA_jUddXvY7v0VkYRbANnTnzkA_HMFtQ&t=253
I think for a month or so there should be any defederating, we need some stability that people are used to on reddit. If the boat keeps rocking too much it'll shake ppl off it and they'll just go back go reddit cuz it's less of a hassle to deal with the constant infighting.
These are all cosequences of a federated approach.
Also we absolutely need moderation tools in the internet. There are way too many jerks out there. Fortunately people like to stick together with like-minded people and form groups. Especially after they've been shouted at, banned, etc. the jerks will find their own instance and we can cut contact to all jerks at once.
I like defederation for that. However, it is the deliberate act of destroying the one thing you've invented the fediverse to do: to 'federate' with other instances. If you do that too often, you kill the idea and the spirit of the fediverse. Probably followed by killing your platform, community and the mood of everyone involved.
We need nice people. Good people pushing the buttons in the backend. Diversity. And a healty way to communicate and moderate.
One thing is: If i run an instance of something like lemmy: It's my decision what to do with it. I bought the server. I pay the electricity and internet bill. I face the consequences and get nasty mail by the police if someone does something illegal with it. And maybe i invited my friends to join. It's the same like inviting them to my barbecue party. I don't want them to be shouted at by some right-wing nuts, there.
There is one simple consequence that is important to know for the user: Chose the right instance for you! Diversity is a great thing. And we all know it's too difficult for a new user to also know which instance to join. But it's absolutely necessary to put some effort in. You need an instance that federates with like-minded people and which owners are aligned to your own morale and ethics. You can't join something else and the complain. That way, you'll probably be lost for the fediverse, after too many negative impressions.
view more: next ›