• phillaholic@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    And then instances start fighting and decelerate from each other and it becomes this annoying game of will I be able to see the content I want to tomorrow? We’ll see how it turns out. Needing to keep moving instances isn’t my idea of a good thing like everyone else seems to think it is.

    • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      If that is the case, then the Lemmy will start to shrink or straight up die, but that is life.

      That’s the risk of the federation. But I much prefer that than a monolithic black box controlled by a mega corpo.

      • phillaholic@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I just want to find the content I like, the content that helps me solve problems, and a way to interact with it without being forced to see ads. I’m not going to use a worse product just because it’s not controlled by a corporation and I don’t think I’m alone in that across most of the population.

        • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Then maybe Lemmy isn’t for you then. The way the fediverse is structured at its core seems to be a problem for you.

          • phillaholic@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I don’t see it as a problem. If my instance starts walking off the content I like, then it’s a problem. But it’ll be a slow burn where I just use it less and less.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes.

      I think a fully p2p system with a community, a user, and a post being identified by a key and connected via asymmetric cryptography, and then a reputation system yielding a number between, say, -100 and +100, would work better.

      That reputation system wouldn’t be like karma, it would possibly also affect whether we store something below -50 score, to then share.

      It should be relative - we may attribute an evaluation to a thing, which would affect its children. Or we may attribute an evaluation to a user, and then derive score for a thing from that user’s evaluation of it. Or maybe all of the described.

      Maybe something like that is going to be easier to build on Locutus when it becomes operational.

      • tal@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I don’t think that any single score is going to make everyone happy.

        Maybe if there are multiple user-scoring systems run by various sources, and I can choose which score I want to use as a metric.

        Like, I think that the Marxist-Leninist crowd on some of the left-wing instances is bonkers, but I imagine that they’d say the same thing about me or other people who subscribe to mainstream economics in general. You’re not going to find a Single Source of Truth on that matter.

        • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Eh, that was the whole point. Do not leave moderation to other people or at least make that easy.

          It should be relative

          Which means that the score of anything would be derived from 1) what you directly set, 2) what another user sets, modified by what you set for that user, 3) what a user sets, modified by what is set for him by another user, which has a value set by you attributed …

          One can even make a logic where you see high score for things disliked by people you dislike.

          There is some computative difficulty, but nothing big for our times.