All of this user’s content is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0
I subconsciously tried wiping my screen.
Of course. My inquiry was out of theoretical curiosity, and not so much anything practicaly useful for security, or privacy.
I’m not sure that there is much for actual server side support for cross posting just yet, but there is a way, at least on the web UI: if you click the two overlapping squares under you post title, it’ll open a new post with a link to the previous post and its content quoted underneath. It feels more like a work around for cross posting, but it does work.
I was referring to Rule 3 of the community:
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy
TL;DR: There is no singular answer to your question, imo. Essentially just run the instance transparently, reliably, and actively, and it will be attractive to people.
I’m not sure that there is one “best way” to grow an instance. An instance is essentially the fundamental governing framework for how the users interract with each other. You structure the rules around how you believe the users on your instance should interact, and those who agree with those rules will be drawn to them. Ideally, for sustainable growth in an instance, you also need reliable server infrastructure – the instance should be responsive, and have a reliable uptime. An instance’s admins must also actively moderate content. An instance with inactive moderators is not sustainable, and will quickly delve into hosting unwanted content on the instance which is undesirable for users.
This post possibly violates Rule 3 of [email protected].
Flatpak – It’s not without it’s own issues, of course, but it does the job. I’m not fan of how snaps are designed, and I don’t think canonical is trustworthy enough to run a packaging format. Appimages are really just not good for widespread adoption. They do what they are designed to do well, but I don’t think it’s wide to use them as a main package format.
Idk anything about that community, but I feel like it’s safe to assume that Discord isn’t going to take kindly to the existence of a server that, from the name, appears to be centered around piracy. I haven’t checked (someone please correct me if I’m wrong), but I feel like it’s safe to assume that piracy is something that would violate Discord’s ToS. Just use Matrix – I implore you.
I’ve heard that ReFS is supposedly replacing NTFS, on Windows.
I feel like it’s rather pointless to try and contort discord to be something that it’s not. If you are truly concerned about your privacy, then your best move is to just use something else. An example of an alternative would be Matrix.
Y’all don’t update your services?
Your account data is also not protected
Do you just mean that your messages, for example, are stored on the server, and can thus be deleted by the server admin? Would you mind elaborating?
Would you mind elaborating?
It’s wrong to say matrix is only the protocol.
Matrix is only the protocol. Synapse is the name of the server software. “matrix.org” is just the URL of the main homeserver.
From Matrix’s About section:
Matrix is an open protocol for decentralised, secure communications.
Here, you can find Synapse.
matrix stores your profile info
group membership
ongoing conversation in plaintext
As I am not exactly sure what you are referring to.
In addition to metadata that matrix doesn’t encrypt
I’m assuming that this statement is referring to what was said here:
On the other hand, matrix stores your profile info, group membership, and ongoing conversation in plaintext, some of them replicated across homeservers
Hm, I have trouble trusting any information on that site for a number of reasons:
- There have been no code audit and an independent security analysis, and hence we must take Element’s word. No one can mark his own homework.
- Matrix has had at least one embarrassing security breach, indicating that their infrastructure security is lacking.
They seem to be referring to “Matrix”, and “Element” interchangeably which doesn’t make any logical sense as “Matrix” describes the underlying federation protocol, and “Element” one of many clients that exist. This line of thinking can also be seen in the comparison table; the column title is “Element/Riot”, and yet much of the data contained in the table is referring to things related to the protocol.
There have been no code audit and an independent security analysis, and hence we must take Element’s word. No one can mark his own homework.
Ignoring that they say “Element”, and, instead, assuming that they intended to say “Matrix”, from what I can see, there are at least two independent audits that have been done – their respective information can be found on the blog posts here, and here. and secondly,
Matrix has had at least one embarrassing security breach, indicating that their infrastructure security is lacking.
Ignoring the fact that this statement makes no logical sense since “Matrix” is a protocol, and therefore the idea of a “security” breach does not even apply, I’m going to instead assume that they are referring to the home-server “matrix.org”. The security breach I’m assuming that they are referring to is described in the blog post here:
TL;DR: An attacker gained access to the servers hosting Matrix.org. The intruder had access to the production databases, potentially giving them access to unencrypted message data, password hashes and access tokens.
I’m not entirely sure what the author was insinuating, since this is just something that affected the matrix.org homeserver and no one else, and has absolutely nothing to do with the security of the protocol on the whole. The only important thing with this is whether or not the retrived unencrypted data (ignoring the messages) has any affect of compromising the security of the user – this author, unfortunately, makes no effort to explore this idea, and just moves on.
There are plenty of other discontinuties that can be picked apart from this person’s site, but these were the most immediately glaring.
Is Connect open source? I can’t find a repo for it.
What I like about the Gadsden flag, as opposed to this one – according to how I interpret it, anyways – is that it advocates for the use of one’s voice before violence. The main symbol on the Gadsden flag is a timber rattlesnake. If you think about such a rattlesnake in nature, when you get too close to them, or provide them with a reason to feel wary, or uncomfortable they won’t immediately attack you, but will instead provide you with an auditory, nonviolent warning. It’s only when one ignores their warnings, and continues to harass the snake, or give them a reason to think that they are under immediate threat of harm that they will fight back, and will not hesitate to do so. In all other circumstances, the rattlesnake will mind it’s own business, and let you do the very same. I find this behaviour admirable of a creature, and it is, in my opinion, the true ethos of libertarianism. The Canada goose, on the other hand, won’t hesitate to harass you. they will routinely attack people just relaxing in a park. They provide little warning to someone that they find threatening, and will often choose to immediately strike out. This is not behaviour that should be emulated, or admired, in my opinion.