Jacky Alciné
Follow

All — Blog — Notes — Responses — Likes — RSVP — Check-ins — Events — Photos

Previous page 1 of 1066 Next
Jacky Alciné
Okay, just deployed a new version of Lwa . It comes with a lot of new little features but only direct replies work, lol. I'm refactoring how reactions work so you can properly syndicate them when desired. That'll personally help me syndicate a link to the Fediverse or Twitter when needed. I'm also going to add some general UX cleanup and begin working on the subscription components so Lwa can allow you to subscribe to content you see in your reader. Soon Aaron Parecki , you'll have one less user on Aperture! When my Microsub implementation works, the only thing I think I'll be leaning on you for is perhaps Watchtower and that's only until I finish Bondye (yet another project)! Viva la IndieWeb! Lol
2019-12-08T21:46:46.88621-08:00 • 2 interactions
Jacky Alciné

I should probably finish the demo for the Vouch tool first but I REALLY want to begin looking into this Akismet for Abuse (that’s the operative name) tool. My idea for it is a bit of what I’ve seen so far in solutions from other people.

Someone (Client A) receives a post from someone else (Actor A). Before even considering to parse the information request, the software/tooling that Client A has aims to run the incoming post from Actor A. In the land of HTTP, we can do a few things (check the IP it’s coming in from, host name) and go deeper (run nodeinfo checks to see if it matches a criteria like faulty software version, software known to be run by malicious folk like Gab). That could be a first flag but not enough to stop it. A few more tests can be run to see if should be filtered out (content checking - seeing if it doesn’t match a specific content filter, etc). Of course, there can be cases where you do want to let people in. Client A can explicitly mark some people/agents/links as “safe” which would allow it to skip pass everything above here. One could go as far as ‘subscribing’ to another list of “friendly” domains.

Some parts of this is already done in the space of federation but having something like this exist outside of it will allow the IndieWeb to leverage it as well as any other tool that can communicate into the world of HTTP (maybe Dat folks can collab on a bridge?). I know I’ll be tinkering on something like this in the near(-ish) future because dozens of people will need something like this to counteract the vile nature of some people on the Internet. And the applications for this can grow. The most important thing here to not is that the range of the tool is up to the viewer. They can use this to set automatic blocks or use it to move those messages into a separate inbox (I’ll end up doing the separate inbox in my webmention server).

This is my solution/idea/draft, obviously using prior art from things like Blockbot on Twitter and how blocks can federate on the ActivityPub/ActivityStreams world.

2019-12-08T19:08:32.09111-08:00 • 4 interactions
Jacky Alciné
2019-12-08T18:35:04.51854-08:00
Jacky Alciné

If we can’t decide, let alone propose, a DRAFT of a solution for handling foreign agents into a community in a semi-automated protected manner, then there’s almost no point of making it into a problem - it’s just noise.

2019-12-08T17:48:21.10331-08:00 • 2 interactions
Jacky Alciné
Replied to   whomst.dog's post
whomst.dog

@the_gayest_doggo THAT part. That log is dumb long, I had to make sure I read it twice because I knew I’d reflexively skim it.

2019-12-08T17:31:32.31332-08:00
Jacky Alciné

What are some solutions to abuse (more specifically, active content moderation) that people are working on?

In the IndieWeb, we have https://indieweb.org/Vouch being piloted and it’s going to be a early contender for the community.

I’m still personally interested in having something similar to https://akismet.com/ but for arbitrary rules one can set and share remotely to help with moderation (not with automatic banning - the chance for false positives are too high). It’ll help reduce load for those who can’t handle active moderation and give reputable moderators a means to share and train models.

2019-12-08T17:23:57.76537-08:00 • 6 interactions
Jacky Alciné

Nah, fuck it. I’m on the side of restorative justice and healing and I don’t see that coming off strongly from either side. If someone doesn’t know something, I’ll link them and document said occurrence. If they repeat, I’ll link once more. After that, muting and moving on. Blocking is definitely an option if I see them causing harm to OTHERS (because I can handle it to a degree and don’t always publicly post - another failing of most social tools is not allowing for the easy swapping between public, sharable and privileged systems).

2019-12-08T17:23:21.57543-08:00 • 1 interaction
Replied to   Christopher Lemmer Webber's post

@jalcine Not sure what rift you're talking about, but not doubting there is one; the fediverse is eternally in a state of vying egos, which is the most irritating part of participating in it.

At any rate, I'll say that I like having you as part of the fediverse, anyway... I hope you don't leave.

@cwebber@octodon.social + @Gargron@mastodon.social

There’s this semi-loud (loud in the sense that it dominates my timeline) conversation around needing to “cancel” people (which in actuality, doesn’t do anything but exacerbates the issue even more among them since it’s non-restorative by design) and truthfully, it’s fragmenting the place where things (I think) will be done where it won’t work for everyone.

I’m avoiding using explicit names/events until explicitly asked.

2019-12-08T17:08:58.73957-08:00 • 1 interaction
Jacky Alciné

There’s a public log being shared of which I can’t confirm its authenticity but I’m assuming it’s legit and like it ends with the mentioned parties attempting to reel the party in question in from their behavior. Like they say multiple times “dude, you messed up” and I’m not seeing what the problem from it is.

So I have to ask, what is the problem here?

(This is in relation to https://v2.jacky.wtf/post/0d6030f4-81ed-4079-83cb-73f10d90f51d)

2019-12-08T17:02:32.90613-08:00 • 1 interaction
Replied to   Aaron Parecki's post
We were promised that USB-C would solve all our connectivity problems.

Instead, I have two USB-C ports on this laptop, only one of which is Thunderbolt, which is worse because they look identical but act different. Also apparently only some USB-C cables support Thunderbolt too.

This got me a bit curious so I looked up what the differences might be and lol, this is like a reverse XKCD comic. To be honest, the fact that one port can even mimic both of these options is amazing! But now, you have to run around with little lightning bolt stickers for your cables and hardware, lol.

2019-12-08T16:22:36.88924-08:00 • 2 interactions
Previous page 1 of 1066 Next

All — Blog — Notes — Responses — Likes — RSVP — Check-ins — Events — Photos

  •  Home
  •  Follow
  •  Sign In
This site's collected 10858 posts and 7552 mentions. Want to send one? Learn how!
Unless otherwise stated, the content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons license.