I love the Fediverse -- don't get me wrong--, but the fact that Lemmy was built atop a profile-oriented streaming stack, and that server moderators get to decide what servers your personal identity gets to interact with, doesn't sit right with me.

On a whim, a moderator could decide to defederate with one of your favorite servers for no reason at all.

I'm envisioning a server that authenticates you to other servers, accepts notifications to your personal inbox, and hosts its own forums.

One that can whitelist acceptable authentication servers, but doesn't restrict the notifications to your inbox. And doesn't restrict you from signing in elsewhere.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] TheFogan@programming.dev 9 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

Why not, just host your own lemmy instance? Then you'd only get defederated if you got banned basically. or if you are looking for one for you and your friends. then you can just federate with the groups you want to federate with

[–] HelloRoot@lemy.lol 2 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (2 children)

If I remember hearing it correctly, some lemmy instance admins defederate by proxy. Meaning: they go look at your instance, see who you federate with (even if you do it passively by not blacklisting) and then defederate you if you federate with any instances they don't like.

(And tbh, I'd do the same, but it doesn't seem like OP would like that)

[–] schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

If the Lemmy instance isn't public anyway, then it seems like its federation list doesn't have to be public either, so other instance admins would have no way of knowing what such an instance federates with.

[–] HelloRoot@lemy.lol 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Can you leave comments from your non public isntance on communities from other instances ?

[–] schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Yes. I have seen comments before from obscure instances that didn't seem to be open to the public. It wouldn't really make much technical sense to prevent that.

[–] HelloRoot@lemy.lol 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

ok, clearly I don't understand the federation protocol then, because I thought if you can see/interact with the instance (like in the @ after the username), you can find out who they federate with.

[–] schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 3 hours ago

I don't know if that's true if they don't publish a list of that. I certainly wouldn't know how.

[–] ki4jgt@feddit.org 2 points 20 hours ago

I think you should be able to decide which forums and cross-domains users you host and federate with on your own server, but not which cross-domains and forums your users interact with on other servers.

[–] ki4jgt@feddit.org 0 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (2 children)

Because I shouldn't have to be at the mercy of other moderators to communicate with people.

If I have an identity, I should be able to use it however I like.

[–] aaaa@piefed.world 4 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

So don't let people create communities, right?

Then your whole instance would be controlled by you and your whole forum would be yours

[–] ki4jgt@feddit.org 0 points 17 hours ago

The server moderator creates the community, or gives users permission to create communities on their server. I have no problem with that model.

Hosting servers basically have 4 functions:

Registering users
Authenticating users to other servers
Hosting forums
Pushing/Receiving notifications

Let's say you're running server at example.com, and I sign up. My username is bob. So, I'm bob@example.com.

Example.com has several local forums, but they lack a significant tech community. So, I go to example2.com, which has a large tech community. Using my login from example.com (and postMessages), I login to example2.com, as bob@example.com. Example2.com has example.com whitelisted as a valid authenticator. So, it will accept their users.

Let's then say that Bob gets a reply at example2.com. Example2.com pushes a notification to example.com, where Bob can read it.

[–] otter@lemmy.ca 2 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

If you're hosting it yourself, you wouldn't be at the mercy of anyone else. You would get full control over your communication experience, along with any consequences that come along with that.

[–] ki4jgt@feddit.org 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

And, if a moderator of another instance defederates me?

[–] otter@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

If the other party doesn't want to communicate with you, then what are you trying to achieve?

I think I'm missing something from your premise. Who are you trying to connect to in this case?

[–] ki4jgt@feddit.org 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Lemmy works by your posts propagating to other servers.

If you're on server A, and I'm on server B, server B's moderator can block all of server A. They can make it where I never see your content.

[–] otter@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 hours ago

I think in order for this to work, you would need to make it so that the server admins cannot see the contents of the communication. It wouldn't work with public content

At that point, you might be better off using something like Matrix or a similar encrypted chat option.