Why YSK: your upvotes (favorites) and downvotes( reduces) are public information.
If you are browsing through https://kbin.social/ or whatever just click on “more” then activity.
There you’ll see info like boosts, reduces (downvotes), and favorites (upvotes?)
Works with all instances for lemmy or kbin material
Is it the same for Lemmy?
Or for Kbin users when they visit Lemmy?
deleted by creator
That’s interesting, I didn’t know it, it could also be a bit dangerous for toxic users.
indeed. I dont thing this is sane. At least should be optional
Exactly.
It’s who upvote and who downvoted that is available through kbin so for you on this comment
https://kbin.social/m/youshouldknow@lemmy.world/t/82174/YSK-You-can-view-upvote-and-downvote-information-through-kbin/comment/347561/favourites
what ever it is, I dont like it. Nutters will find all ur history and chase you all over the fediworse for stupid reasons. We need some anonymity pls
I think the same, but it won’t be fixed since that’s how activitypub works: https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/issues/3291
Kbin dev said it won’t fix this as it wouldn’t be easy (one user proposed to hide votes for Kbin when posts and comments come from Lemmy): https://codeberg.org/Kbin/kbin-core/issues/3
The problem here is how Kbin handles the information obtained from Lemmy, I guess one way to solve this could be to block interoperability between Lemmy and Kbin.
What’s the difference between a favorite and a boost?
Could you please add a “Why YSK:”? It’s rule #2. :)
That’s true, it is visible. But this information is public, and anyone who has their own instance also has access to it. The interface is consistent with Mastodon and other platforms where you can view likes and boosts. There are several ways to improve this - completely hide this information in the threads section, hide the activity of users from remote instances, or exclude Lemmy’s instances from the activity… but still… It’s just covering up one’s eyes.
I think it was a good idea to let us see it. As long as the information is public, anyone should be able to view it.
That’s true, I don’t think it should be allowed.
Anyone can stand up their own instance, subscribe to remote communities, and start receiving all the data necessary to show those communities. That includes posts, comments, and votes too.
Every instance operator is in control of a database containing all the activity for communities that instance’s users are subscribed to. They can do whatever they like with that data. That’s a consequence of how federation works.
The protocol as it stands today is also generally vulnerable to any malicious instance. A malicious Lemmy server could emit spam, send out bogus votes, or alter its users’ comments after the fact (ahem, spez) and disseminate the modified versions. The main tool that other instances have to deal with a malicious instance is … yup, defederating.
Ultimately, other federated services in Internet history have adopted different ways to deal with this problem:
- IRC doesn’t have a single federation; it has many federations (“IRC networks”), and server operators form peering relationships with one another based on mutual trust and agreement to uphold various rules. A given chat channel only exists on a single IRC network; you can’t reach Libera.chat’s
#linuxfrom a DALnet server. And occasionally a federation completely blows up — see e.g. the 2021 collapse of the Freenode network due to admin abuse. - Usenet pretty much floundered on spam mitigation because well-behaved servers didn’t eject the malicious and ill-maintained ones.
- Email has dozens or hundreds of different ways of dealing with bad instances (i.e. mail servers that emit spam), including published blocklists of known offenders’ IP addresses. But even then, major mail servers depend on all manner of filters (including ML classifiers these days!) on top of straight IP blocking.
- IRC doesn’t have a single federation; it has many federations (“IRC networks”), and server operators form peering relationships with one another based on mutual trust and agreement to uphold various rules. A given chat channel only exists on a single IRC network; you can’t reach Libera.chat’s
Why not? If you are not willing to show colour, the simply don’t vote.
Because we can have better privacy without discouraging engagement.
I see the visibility as a great positive.
How is my privacy affected if my votes are visible?
It affects those who don’t want their votes visible and for random stranger to track their activities. That’s why this is better as an opt in for those who want them and have them be invisible for those who don’t want to share it. Think of how you can set your Youtube playlists like favourites to private or unlisted.
I think it is fine, since likes on twitter have been public. People just need to change their habits on upvoting and downvoting that they got used to when they were on reddit. So need to adjust to how people would go and downvote whatever comment they disliked and move on. Now that stuff is public, so maybe it can help against brigading?
I’m more concerned about the more toxic people having access to the names and profiles of people who downvote them. Reddit had a lot of crazies, and it seems like a good tool for targeted harassment. Not to mention, what’s stopping them from having alt accounts on different instances and continuing even after they’ve been blocked or even banned on one account?
That is valid. It’s part of why I wanted to make people know about how upvoting and downvoting works so they can be more mindful about how they use it.
I can see this information on Lemmy without jumping through hoops… Is this meant for kbin users?
It’s meant for everyone federated through ActivityPub.
