Features

Nice things about PieFed:

• Written in a common programming language that many developers understand and which has a bright future ahead of it. Python, of course! This will enable more contributions from a wider range of people than if it was made with Erlang, Ruby, Rust or PHP, for example.
• Constructed in a simple and straightforward manner that new contributors can come to grips with quickly. No fancy algorithms, special design patterns, fragile build process, or front-end framework. Just Flask with sprinklings of vanilla JS and htmx.
• Keep third party dependencies to an absolute minimum, to make server administration easier. Python + database (PostgreSQL) and you’re good to go! Redis optional.
• Consume few resources, to make it cheap to run. Many examples of federated software are bloated Rube Goldberg machines that require hefty servers and serious server administration skills, making money a constant problem. PieFed instances will be small and nimble.
• Emphasise trust, safety and happiness, drawing inspiration from the Mastodon Covenant.
• Built to last using tried and true technology that will still work decades from now.

Differences between Lemmy and PieFed

• Comments with -10 score are collapsed by default.
• Communities are organized into topics. See https://piefed.social/topics.
• Image-heavy communities can have a tiled/masonry view, like https://piefed.social/c/[email protected]
• People who get downvoted a lot end up with a ‘low reputation’ indicator next to their name. You’ll know it when you see it.
• Hide all posts based on keyword filters.
• Keyboard shortcuts.
• Upvotes in meme communities do not add to reputation.
• Better UI design (somewhat subjective!)
• Improved hotness ranking algorithm (subjective)
• Voting is private.
• See also features for healthy communities.
• Each community has it’s own wiki.

Mastodon Covenant & “safe spaces” are overmoderated trash. Features for healthy communities consist of Reddity moderation tactics.

Heavy handed moderation is the main reason Reddit disgusts me, so no thanks, & fuck that shit.

Like this?

That’s pretty good: could that go in the OP body or is editing not possible?

Not in the OP. For primarily text content, images of them are pretty pointless: there are links to source, quotes, etc.

That’s a pleasant idea: best ways on going about that?

Make them publishers or whatever is required to have it be a legal requirement, have them ban people who share false information.

The law doesn’t magically make open discussions not open. By design, social media is open.

If discussion from the public is closed, then it’s no longer social media.

ban people who share false information

Banning people doesn’t stop falsehoods. It’s a broken solution promoting a false assurance.

Authorities are still fallible & risk banning over unpopular/debatable expressions that may turn out true. There was unpopular dissent over covid lockdown policies in the US despite some dramatic differences with EU policies. Pro-palestinian protests get cracked down. Authorities are vulnerable to biases & swayed.

Moreover, when people can just share their falsehoods offline, attempting to ban them online is hard to justify.

If print media, through its decline, is being held legally responsible

Print media is a controlled medium that controls it writers & approves everything before printing. It has a prepared, coordinated message. They can & do print books full of falsehoods if they want.

Social media is open communication where anyone in the entire public can freely post anything before it is revoked. They aren’t claiming to spread the truth, merely to enable communication.

That it’s irresponsible to sell a false bill of goods: a company sincere about not giving a fuck & that merely puts out an advisory is more credible than one that entertains illusions that fact-checking all social media isn’t a foolish endeavor. We don’t get that in reality, so why should we pretend we can get that online? Ultimately, the burden & responsibility to work out the truth is & has always been with the individual, and it’s irresponsible to pretend we can sever or transfer that responsibility, especially in an open medium like the town square, social media, or general reality.

There’s also the intractable problem of settling the truth. Why should anyone trust a company or anyone to be arbiter of truth? Infallible authorities don’t exist & they are inevitably going to get this wrong & draw wild conclusions like that pro-palestinian protests are antisemitic & need to be censored. While they could merely place notes/comments of fallible, researched opinions, we already get that with discussions like in real life.

Social media isn’t a controlled publication like an encyclopedia or news agency that chooses its writers & staff. It’s a communication platform open to the public.

Instead of promoting a false sense of confidence that lowers people’s guard with assurances no one can deliver, it’s better to cut the pretense, admit there is no real solution, and remind everyone the obvious—unreliable information from anyone is untrustworthy, so they need to grow up, verify their information, and keep their guard up.

Doesn’t reminding users not to be so gullible address that?

A problem is promoting unrealistic expectations that untrustworthy information is reliable because someone else will unerringly determine the truth & catch falsehoods from spreading. Claiming that ever made sense is bogus.

I’d rather “trust” a company that cuts the bullshit with notices like

The stories and information posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood.
Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact.

to remind the user that trusting noncredible information from unreliable sources is a ridiculous concept.

Oh noes: a private company that has no duty to challenge falsehoods has given up any pretense of giving a fuck.

Alternative: put entry point code in file __main__.py & run the containing package (eg, some_package) as a top-level expression (eg, python -m some_package).

Most likely written by AI

Are comments like this most likely written by AI? Am I AI?

Obligatory em dash—done!

I don’t continue reading

Seems like willful illiteracy & incomplete evidence fallacy. There was literally all the resources on the internet & a quick search to check hastily drawn conclusions before posting them.

Cool, another preachy argument that jumps to irrational conclusions. Because Ghibli?

It is a display of power: You as an artist, an animator, an illustrator, a writer, any creative person are powerless. We will take what we want and do what we want. Because we can.

Uh…we always could & did. Imitators have been doing that since always, long before LLMs. No one owns an art style.

This is the idea of might makes right. The banner that every totalitarian and fascist government rallied under.

That’s the argument? Plagiarism & imitating art styles is fascism? Wow! The rest of the article is worse.

Please make the word fascism more meaningless.