Nope. The actual purpose functionality seems unclear to me.

Edited.

This exactly. With a federated app store, how would users verify that apps hadn’t been tampered with? Federation isn’t a one size fits all solution.

And yes, “a future Fediverse OS” isn’t a potential, it’s a hallucination.

I repressed that. Most of what I remember from that book is about the killer robot dog that is really a Good Boy. Also, never to buy a set of VR glasses from Mark Zuckerberg.

Huh. So the future we’re living in is Minority report but instead of precog copaganda it’s petty commercial entities excluding you on the basis of old tweets.

Plume isn’t currently actively maintained, unfortunately. It’s right below the fold of the page you linked 😞

As for customisability, I think writefreely has some different themes to choose from, they’re just hidden away in the docs or on github.

So, I was probably (one of) the first to post that “Pixelfed leaks private posts” thing on here? I first wrote a long reply to this, but it sort if got away from me. The short version would be,

A) sure, the fediverse has a bullying problem in the sense that people do, and that that is usually exacerbated in any online comment field. People are awful, and that includes me, you, Dansup, and anybody reading this. We’re also usually pretty brilliant when nobody’s looking.

B) despite what I write above, I don’t take bullying lightly. I am really uncomfortable with how you use the generally phrased headline to address this specific case. You’re not writing about the fediverse as such, you’re casting Dansup as a victim.

C) Dan’s up, Dan’s down, Dan’s a victim, Dan’s throwing a fit online and then deleting the tweets. As you cite in OP, some people attribute all sorts of unrelated evil to him. Most of all, my impression is Dansup has as a hard time separating from his role as main developer on Pixelfed, Loops, etc, as online commenters has separating his work from (perceived) personal faults.

D) let’s imagine those projects were fully open sourced and developed by the community already. Would we be in the same situation here? Again, resorting to ad hominem bullying in online discussion is unacceptable, but I do question that Dansup is an unequivocable victim. Nor is he an evil mastermind who has engineered this situation to garner pity. He just seems to be extremely hard working, with a generous pinch of need for control of his projects.

I’ve seen Japanese artist deleted their account because they mistaken a joke towards their art as hate comment.

Yikes! I wanted to comment that it would be clear that you’re using a translation service of some kind if you reply in a different language from the post, and the other part might take that into consideration — but clearly that isn’t a given.

Judging from the video thumbnail, I’m going to guess this youtuber says no, they aren’t.

Whut. I mean, probably, but not in this thread?

Ah, good catch. Thanks!

Edited to add: I got this around the wrong foot, see the reply to this. /edit

Not necessarily, as clearly stated in the linked article:

But sure enough, the toot was followers only and the person that had liked it was not following her Mastodon account. When I took a look at the other persons profile on pixelfed.social, I noticed that the instance was nevertheless claiming the account was following her.

When pixelfed assumes that an account is not locked, it immediately treats a follow attempt as completed. For the server on the other end it looks like a normal follow request. It could be rejected, and pixelfed would still be convinced that a follow relation exists.

If I understand it correctly, it’s kind of both. Sounds like Pixelfed didn’t follow best practice setting privacy guardrails in follow request approval, and it exacerbates the inherent lack of privacy on the fediverse.

You’re right of course, anyone (with the coding chops) could’ve intentionally set up an instance that does the same for malicious purposes. That should be a wake-up call for anyone who thinks ActivityPub is a great sexting medium.

Nope. It looks like crash testing security in production, or “fuck around and find out” with other people’s privacy.

Yeah, people tend to mistake “federated” for “open alternative” 🤷

Is it me or do most of these OT promotional posts come from diggita.com? Time to tighten up the registration criteria (or block lists) perhaps?

This is key to a calm timeline on Mastodon (as it was on Twitter): Mute accounts liberally — and mute hashtags as well. There will be a maddening amount of noise, and since there is no algorithm on Mastodon, it’s up to yourself to focus in the important stuff.

So basically what Drew DeVault wrote about the other day I guess?

Same with Ghost, but Docker may be a bit too involved for non-techies.

FWIW, you can setup IndieAuth — on its own or as part of the IndieWeb plugin suite for Wordpress. It may not be quite what you’re looking for, but it’s a step in the right direction?

I think I understand the self hosted identity server part, and authenticating with it on different sites. But what is the federated element you’re talking about? What would that instance federate, and with whom?

If we’re moving into a single sign-on for several federated accounts, that’s cool. People have been asking for that for ages! But the identity provider itself wouldn’t (need to) be federated for that to work, right?