Dissenter Abandoned: Who will be picking up the ball? #117
Comments
|
The problem is Goolag, and Firefux have been able to prohibit the ability of the extension from even being installed on their browsers. That is why is has been abandoned. It is possible to install on forks of Firefux such as Waterfox and Pale Moon. |
|
@tcreek, I'd install it in my Firefox if I could download the Unfortunately, what Gab seems to insist on is an entire browser, rather than just the extension. Even if my OS was included in the list, I wouldn't want a browser fork anyway -- those tend to miss on security patches, unfortunately... |
|
You can download the file right here. That is what GitHub is for. https://github.com/gab-ai-inc/gab-dissenter-extension/releases/tag/r12 You can try to put the extension on, but I do not think it is going to let you. With the new extensions, Mozilla came up with security certificates. Without a valid one, the browser will not allow you to install the extension. Mozilla pulled Gab's certificate. Waterfox does not miss any security patches. |
Thank you! Just worked fine in Firefox-76 -- this is a much less invasive option for people, than replacing the entire browser. Got to advertise this route instead, in my opinion.
Interesting... Was it for something like "hate speech" or some other reason?
My understanding is, that it does, unfortunately -- the developer just cannot keep up... :( |
|
You can read all about it here. Waterfox sold out to some other company so they can now get help on upkeep. |
Wow... That's seriously bad. Well, at least, one can still install it directly. Before Github similarly reacts to some SJW's complaint, you should move the installable artifacts to Gab.com itself -- and advertise the extensions instead of browser-replacements. |
|
Yeah, Microsoft now owns GitHub, and before they threatened Gab over comments when they were still using Azure. Now they are using Cloudflare, which is also known for censorship after the shuttered the 8chan server over "hate" speech. Not sure why they want to continue to do business with them. |
|
Well, Github can still be used for development, but the installable build-artifacts should be moved elsewhere. Such as onto Gab.com itself. |
|
They did have them at Dissenter site, but removed them, and now pimping their Chromium Based Browser. That is very sad. Google owns and controls Chromium. |
|
Well, if the software project behind the extension cannot -- by itself -- make up its mind, then that is a problem of its own. Adding an extension is easy -- I just did it, for example (and then even posted to Gab about it too). But replacing the entire browser is a non-starter proposition, in my not so humble opinion. |
|
There is already a workaround to the problem, either they don't know , or care. There are already plugins which allow you to do the same thing as the Dissenter extension already works. Notice on some sites (like YouTube) they have modified your page to show a new button labeled "Dissent This." That plugin I linked to will allow you to do the same thing. |
|
I'm confused, because I still run Dissenter plugin in Chrome. Sure when you start Chrome it bugs you about "do you want to run a developer extension", but hey it works. And a comment above seems to imply you can get it to work in Firefox. Why has Gab dropped the ball on this? I don't necessarily want to replace my whole browser to use Dissenter. |
|
One should not even be using anything Chromium based, after all Google did ban it. You are just supporting their bad censorship behavior. Though I do agree they should of found workarounds instead of just giving up. |
|
Tampermonkey does not do the same thing as dissenter. Is there a user script accomplishes the same thing as Dissenter? |
You use Tapermonkey to do that same thing as Dissenter |
|
This Tampermonkey looks quite interesting actually, but in terms of replacing dissenter the question is, what script would you use in Tampermonkey, how easy would ordinary users be able to find it, where would the comments be stored, and would that organisation censor them, and would Tampormonkey have the willingness and/or ability to censor scripts that replace dissenter. Finally if all those issues are overcome, who is going to sell it to the world. |
|
You use the Tampermonkey script. Nothing would change, just how Dissenter is programmed. I do believe they have a means to blacklist scripts. But the point is, Gab seems to give up on things very easy. I mean they been endlessly complaining about PayPal, and Mastercard, while thousands of other types of payment processing is available. Heck, people can even go to a local store to make payment with cash with certain payment processes. |
|
I mean, let's say someone puts up a Tampermonkey script that talks to the Dissenter servers. Then the outrage mob go mad, Google leans on Tampermonkey to remove that script at pain of having Tampermonkey taken out of the Google store. Then Tampermonkey either bans the Dissenter script, or Google bans Tampermonkey, then you are back at square one. Meanwhile somebody has spent a lot of time making that work. I mean, you can understand why nobody is rushing down that path. Still, I'm happy to see anybody give it a go. I'm not familiar with what Gap has been doing about payment processing. They were pretty persistent in finally getting a Gab app back into the Android store though through the Masterdon backdoor. |
|
I can't say much here, but I've been working on and off on a project that will eventually be on Abuty.com. An associate of mine and myself have been working on it for a few years and were shocked the idea was culminated in the form of Dissenter. We were pleased someone had more resourced to make it happen, but I am saddened to see the project fumble. I for one have not forgotten about the need for this project and have been working to catch up on other higher priority projects before getting back to work on Abuty. I would be very interested in forming a group of programmers or joining forces to continue the project. I cannot discuss openly what else I am working on that ties in Abuty, but let's just say it is sorely needed and very positive thing for society as a whole. |
|
Let me clarify here that Dissenter was nearly identical in function to what Abuty had been working on. Once Dissenter launched, we put our project on hold due to other priorities. We were going to take Abuty much further than what Dissenter has done, including allowing for people to be able to be verified but create new online personas that are also automatically verified based on the original real user. So many great aspects to what we had been working on. How much interest really is there for this. The conditions need to be right for widespread adoption. Perhaps talking with the folks over at Parler? |
|
In my opinion, Dissenter, or something like it could be absolutely HUGE and game changing. But like all things on the internet, the question is what spark would light the fire of adoption. The incumbents have a lot of power to guide you away from it. And you need to think carefully about technology and what combination of plugins, external apps or whatever is going to be both easy to use and ban proof. Google and Apple control too much. The final answer might be an army of lawyers bringing an antitrust suit or something. |
|
Section 230 says that "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider" (47 U.S.C. § 230). With POTUS's recent signal to clear the way for legal clarification on what a publisher is by the Federal Communications Commission, we may in fact be finding ourselves back in a position soon where companies like Google cannot restrict a public based on whether it allows "hate speech" or not. To me this is akin to shutting down an ISP for the crimes committed by it's users. In fact, it's worse than that because Chrome plugins are software but don't necessarily use any network or service provided by the browser's maker. In fact, Chrome and Firefox browsers are not only open sourced, but licensed in such a way others are free to create derivative works. The only argument they might possibly have is that they don't want to publish extensions within their extensions catalog and that being a "service", they don't have to publish it. HOWEVER: That should not mean they also have the right to prevent the plugins or extensions from working. I am watching the situation regarding legal clarification requests by Trump and others to see how this will potentially effect us. I believe we will see a clear path to lawsuits soon by individuals and companies with teeth that will cause mayhem to the big tech companies who censor and in turn, a path to restoring our ability to provide these kinds of free speech tools we have every right to distribute and use here in America. |
|
I have noticed a significant decrease in the usage of Dissenter since Gab started pushing "Trends" over it. |
|
If you try to create a gab account which is required for dissenter then you will see that you will not receive the required email. |
I 100% agree with you. Given what we've seen happening in America and elsewhere with the hard push to censor by our power hungry totalitarian overlord wannabees, it's become painfully apparent we should be addressing the root problems that enable censorship in the first place. Everything from DNS servers, ISP's, hosting providers, software stacks etc all need to be fortified. Part of what I have been working on is to do just this, at least in my own microworld of software development. I just moved all my important domain names over to Epik as my first line of defense. Moved everything into Docker containers that be deployed anywhere. I now run a private Docker Swarm and shifting soon to Kubernetes. Geo-replicated across at minimum, 3 regions. I moved my DNS servers to the same ones that the Epoch Times uses and have made a hard push to move all my private communications to in-house managed services. Mattermost instances instead of Slack, for example. Two-factor authentication services that rely on SMS through Twilio or other services have been in the process of being moved to using methods that do not require these kinds of services. Federated social network platforms like Mastidon, Peertube and Pleroma are great options for many who need to make the shift. If the Dissenter idea can be re-worked to use federated technologies such as Pleroma instead of a central point where comments are held, this would go a very long way to preventing network-wide censorship strategies used by the overlords. I am looking at how Pleroma could be implemented in Abuty's project. A browser plugin just doesn't seem to be the strategy we want to take anymore, given the problems we face with that. A separate browser seems drastic, but it's about the only good option. The Dissenter browser works great but we still have that nagging problem that comments are held in one place. I have a few possibly good ideas to help fix this problem once and for all and would really like to discuss this with others who have the skills or desired to fix the problem. |
|
Much better than federated solutions, is IPFS. We need completely distributed services. Making IPFS over TOR in future would be the best solution I can think of.
…On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 10:50 AM, Nick Maietta ***@***.***> wrote:
> In my opinion, Dissenter, or something like it could be absolutely HUGE and game changing. But like all things on the internet, the question is what spark would light the fire of adoption. The incumbents have a lot of power to guide you away from it. And you need to think carefully about technology and what combination of plugins, external apps or whatever is going to be both easy to use and ban proof. Google and Apple control too much. The final answer might be an army of lawyers bringing an antitrust suit or something.
I 100% agree with you.
Given what we've seen happening in America and elsewhere with the hard push to censor by our power hungry totalitarian overlord wannabees, it's become painfully apparent we should be addressing the root problems that enable censorship in the first place. Everything from DNS servers, ISP's, hosting providers, software stacks etc all need to be fortified. Part of what I have been working on is to do just this, at least in my own microworld of software development. I just moved all my important domain names over to Epik as my first line of defense. Moved everything into Docker containers that be deployed anywhere. I now run a private Docker Swarm and shifting soon to Kubernetes. Geo-replicated across at minimum, 3 regions.
I moved my DNS servers to the same ones that the Epoch Times uses and have made a hard push to move all my private communications to in-house managed services. Mattermost instances instead of Slack, for example. Two-factor authentication services that rely on SMS through Twilio or other services have been in the process of being moved to using methods that do not require these kinds of services.
Federated social network platforms like Mastidon, Peertube and Pleroma are great options for many who need to make the shift. If the Dissenter idea can be re-worked to use federated technologies such as Pleroma instead of a central point where comments are held, this would go a very long way to preventing network-wide censorship strategies used by the overlords.
I am looking at how Pleroma could be implemented in Abuty's project.
A browser plugin just doesn't seem to be the strategy we want to take anymore, given the problems we face with that. A separate browser seems drastic, but it's about the only good option. The Dissenter browser works great but we still have that nagging problem that comments are held in one place.
I have a few possibly good ideas to help fix this problem once and for all and would really like to discuss this with others who have the skills or desired to fix the problem.
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, [view it on GitHub](#117 (comment)), or [unsubscribe](https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACIRPRY36OJM2OLGML5O6V3S2WZ65ANCNFSM4LQ2BHKA).
|
Okay, i will have to look into IPFS. I don't think I've heard of this. |
|
On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 11:06 AM, Nick Maietta ***@***.***> wrote:
> Much better than federated solutions, is IPFS. We need completely distributed services. Making IPFS over TOR in future would be the best solution I can think of.
> […](#)
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 10:50 AM, Nick Maietta @.***> wrote: > In my opinion, Dissenter, or something like it could be absolutely HUGE and game changing. But like all things on the internet, the question is what spark would light the fire of adoption. The incumbents have a lot of power to guide you away from it. And you need to think carefully about technology and what combination of plugins, external apps or whatever is going to be both easy to use and ban proof. Google and Apple control too much. The final answer might be an army of lawyers bringing an antitrust suit or something. I 100% agree with you. Given what we've seen happening in America and elsewhere with the hard push to censor by our power hungry totalitarian overlord wannabees, it's become painfully apparent we should be addressing the root problems that enable censorship in the first place. Everything from DNS servers, ISP's, hosting providers, software stacks etc all need to be fortified. Part of what I have been working on is to do just this, at least in my own microworld of software development. I just moved all my important domain names over to Epik as my first line of defense. Moved everything into Docker containers that be deployed anywhere. I now run a private Docker Swarm and shifting soon to Kubernetes. Geo-replicated across at minimum, 3 regions. I moved my DNS servers to the same ones that the Epoch Times uses and have made a hard push to move all my private communications to in-house managed services. Mattermost instances instead of Slack, for example. Two-factor authentication services that rely on SMS through Twilio or other services have been in the process of being moved to using methods that do not require these kinds of services. Federated social network platforms like Mastidon, Peertube and Pleroma are great options for many who need to make the shift. If the Dissenter idea can be re-worked to use federated technologies such as Pleroma instead of a central point where comments are held, this would go a very long way to preventing network-wide censorship strategies used by the overlords. I am looking at how Pleroma could be implemented in Abuty's project. A browser plugin just doesn't seem to be the strategy we want to take anymore, given the problems we face with that. A separate browser seems drastic, but it's about the only good option. The Dissenter browser works great but we still have that nagging problem that comments are held in one place. I have a few possibly good ideas to help fix this problem once and for all and would really like to discuss this with others who have the skills or desired to fix the problem. — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, [view it on GitHub]([#117 (comment)](#117 (comment))), or [unsubscribe](https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACIRPRY36OJM2OLGML5O6V3S2WZ65ANCNFSM4LQ2BHKA).
Okay, i will have to look into IPFS. I don't think I've heard of this.
It's a world-wide torrent-like network. Each file has an unique CID and when you download them you also become a server node to provide it to others.
Currently Brave offers an ipfs companion natively and you have to install ipfs-desktop. The same devw also made the filecoin, a crypto coin that works on top of ipfs where you can earn cryptocurrency for storing data (I.e. A distributed Dropbox).
Check on http://ipfs.io
|
Thank you. I took a quick lookover of this project and so far I like what I am seeing. I will deploy an instance on a dedicated cloud instance at Vultr and get my hands dirty. I like many of the features already built in, a few of which I was actually already working on. I very much appreciate you pointing this project out to me. Thanks! |
|
In my opinion, use a browser extension, but then release your own browser with it included. That way users who are addicted to their own browsers have a possibility of getting it working. Heck, the dissenter extension still works in Chrome, you've just got to jump through a few hoops. Forcing everyone to use your browser just makes one more way for the project to fail. Especially since maintaining a browser is a huge chunk more work. |
|
So where the fuck do i find this 94.0 ? Hmmm... there is not even a fucking landing page where u find the link... a google search does not find anything (quick).... you see the problem? Who the fuck installs a addon if its that hard to find?...... Like always, very optimistic this "open source" but does not work for normies..... |
That's a problem -- or not -- with advertising/promotion. But the extension is available. Even if you cannot install it through Mozilla.org, you can install directly -- from Github. It is not blocked and works with the latest Firefox. This means, there is no point looking for a (much developing anew) different browser. Just add it to your regular Firefox or whatever...
Firefox browser can be downloaded from right here. Then -- proceed to link posted by @tcreek last year and download the Dissenter extension. |
It says Waterfox, but they patch the browser with security patches directly from Firefox
|
No idea, how to explain that problem -- other than to reiterate, that the actual Firefox does not have it -- not on my home computer. Maybe, you (or your employer) have some additional restrictions enabled -- just a guess. Was your extension installed from Mozilla "store", or directly from Github? |
Maybe you are using an older unpatched browser? This is how they can block extensions under the guise of "malicious extensions." https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2019/05/02/add-on-policy-and-process-updates/ |
Didn't I just state today, in a few posts above, that my Firefox is version 94.0? Which is only one micro-version behind the current-latest (94.0.1)...
I suspect, this applies only to things installed via Mozilla's own add-on "store". If you download it from Github and install directly, you can use it for ever (or until some API-change breaks it, which is another story). |
Thx.... If u search on google for dissenter, no WHERE NEAR you will find this information.... how the fuck should anyone know, that you have to klick on "r12" in this link: https://github.com/gab-ai-inc/gab-dissenter-extension ???? Where is that promoted? You know it.... and.... who else? Where is it written? Why is it not promoted by gab directly to download the file for Firefox.... (jea it works also again for me) but thats the FINE details that makes a product SUCEED or FAIL and this is a total FAIL!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
The extension was advertised on Gab -- if Torba cared for it, he could still do it. Even if Mozilla still had it in their "store", you'd still need to raise awareness for people to even look for it...
All I was saying was, it is not blocked -- and is available. I use it -- sometimes -- to post links to Gab... Perhaps, Andrew wanted folks to stay on Gab -- instead of having (some) discussions move to Dissenter.com. |
I was never really interested in Gab, but after Dissenter came out, I was on board. I would see hundreds, of comments on various sites made. One thing I do recall, is a check mark if you wanted the comment to also appear on Gab. After the ban, they just gave up, and I gave it up also, along with Gab. Not sure why it is working with some, but not others |
|
It's good to see people still keeping this thread alive, hopefully somebody at some point will change the internet by making this work. Gab, and the new Trump media platform are apparently based on Mastodon, a federated social platform. Google hasn't banned mastodon apps, even though they can be used to access Gab as a Mastodon platform. One could presumably develop a plugin where the developers ostensibly distance themselves from any particular social media platform, but that is a gateway into Mastodon. If the comments end up as generic Mastodon postings maybe Google would leave it alone. As always, half the battle is dealing with Google, half is marketing the product well enough to get momentum. I'm pretty sure some technical solution can be found, whether anyone with enough clout can get on board to sell it, I don't know. Could be a billion dollar business if someone figures it out. |
|
It isn't really a fork, but a slightly different approach to the issue. https://github.com/marknoble/gab-dissenter-lite-extension It's not as full-featured - but it gives you a button to push when you want to dissent and makes it super quick and easy if you've already authenticated to Gab. While I'd love to see the full version restored, I also like this super lightweight alternative that gets you to the same destination. |
|
Glad to find this thread - Back when the Dissenter plugin first came out, my first thought was "man, it would be great if this was decentralized". For the uninitiated, those two technologies essentially work like BitTorrent - for example, when a video is uploaded to the LBRY network, the original creator seeds (or serves) it so that it's accessible to others on the network, and when a new person watches it from their LBRY app, they download the video and effectively become a seeder as well. (Additionally, proprietary LBRY front-ends like Odysee can download the entire network and become centralized curators of it which strengthens the network as a whole.) In this way, for a video to be completely removed from the network, all seeders would have to simultaneously 'forget' the video, which is unlikely. If Dissenter worked the same way, when the first comment is made to a given URL, both the URL and comment would be written to a new node in a decentralized LBRY-esque network, and any subsequent comments would also be written to that node. The content of the network would be spread around the various machines that had interacted with the network, and no amount of censorship or lack of funding could disrupt it. Would gladly kick some crypto via a dev-bounty to anyone who is serious about implementing this. EDIT: I see now that there was some discussion of IPFS and Pleroma farther up. Wonderful! |
|
Hi @spencerflagg, i couldn't agree with you more. A colleague of mine and myself have been looking at this for a long time and started strategizing making this happen. We wanted to expand on the idea to make it more appealing for the general public to adopt, like verified identities option and the ability to create new identities for use in commenting. Sometimes, people don't want to use their same username over and over across websites, keeping their real name on some sites, fake names on others, etc. If you would like to take the conversation offline, I would be glad to share some of my thoughts on this problem and strategies to which we can get it implemented. I've already built a prototype, I'll have to dig it out and try and get it working again. (It's been a while). Given the complexity of the problem, I don't feel everything to be discussed should be out in the open. It should be between those who have skin in the game. I've got a few major projects going on but if this one can get some more attention and people are willing to help make this a reality, count me in as being on-board as a developer. I can provide hosting for any website or service it operates on and development time. |
|
Gentlemen, please, don't reinvent the wheel. There already exists a method for decentralized exchange of opinion publicly -- it is called Usenet, and it uses an existing protocol with numerous implementations: NNTP. Standing up one's own NNTP-server is easy -- the hardware- and bandwidh-requirements, which were only affordable for sizeable companies in the 1990-ies, are satisfied by your home computers today. Heck, your phone can run a Usenet node these days. Each server can have its own policies -- deciding, which topics to carry, which users to ban, how much to charge for access (if anything) and so on. Users unsatisfied with policies of one server can switch to another -- without losing accounts and other connections. This is a solved problem... |
|
@UnitedMarsupials. I've owned and operated an internet service provider in the early 2000's and Usenet was a service we provided to all our subscribers as part of our service offerings so I am actually kind of shocked anyone mentioned Usenet. Usenet though, is a mostly centralized system. What we are talking about is the ability to comment on any website, a core function of Dissenter. If we're talking about using Usenet in some capacity under the hood, it's going to have it's own issues. Many, in fact. Being centralized to the operators in a federated system still puts the censorship responsibilities squarely on the operators and also provides a way for authorities to find and seize servers, demand IP's, etc. If the ability of commenting anywhere is to be widely adopted and successful, it needs to be able to be near totally censorship proof. Without a doubt, Usenet is out. Unless you can be more specific about how this could work. I'm open to ideas. |
|
@maletta, all of the issues of Usenet you list (and those you don't) will be present in any other system. And the solutions offered by any other system will be just as implementable by a collection of NNTP-servers. Yes, it was "mostly centralized" -- but not because the centralization was inherent in its design. It was just a convenience -- abusers banned by operators of one node were usually banned by operators of another, because these operators trusted each other by default. But they didn't have to! Seizing servers of a particular node remains just as possible as seizing a BitTorrent or Tor node. And just as "useful"... Individuals with special concern for privacy -- whether because of clinical paranoia or healthy fears over being "controversial" -- can remain anonymous by connecting via Tor and taking other precautions. Think of Gab.com today -- it offers everything we'd like except being decentralized. A zealous government can raid Andrew Torba's "datacenter" and cart off all of his computers. But such raiding becomes pointless, when there are tens (or thousands) other computers carrying the same content -- the only problem they need to solve is speedy updates: reasonably quick sharing of content between themselves. And that's, what NNTP is for... Indeed, one can stand up an NTTP server mirroring Gab.com today! For the full "master-master" replication you'd need Gab's cooperation (because of "accounts"), but a one way (read-only) mirroring can be done without involving pan Torba at all. |
yeah, all these shiny new toys will be wonderful when the power grids go down ... to make this killerapp blackoutproof, lets send avian carriers to negotiate rendezvous points |
|
I wonder if NTTP over IPFS is technically possible. With solutions like DNSLink available, I wonder something can be cobbled together on the cheap for commenting storage and application static asset hosting. Hmm.... Blockchain could be used to create a ledger of activity. An trust authority can be established to mark profiles has being verified. Hmm... |
The problem is sentient drones powered by AI and IPFS enabled robot dogs (see https://www.koda9.com/)) still be solar or nuclear powered. Any ideas on a simple encryption protocol for smoke signals? Encryption over HAM radio not legal according to the FCC so that's out. |
Any such trusted authority can be subverted -- by carrots, or sticks, or a combination of both. It is centralization -- and it is not needed, for it does not solve any problem, that needs solving... |
|
A trust authority would not be at the core of the service. It's only to provide "blue checkmarks" for those who may need or want it. Hell, even I can be bribed for the right amount of money, or "accidently" fall down multiple flights of stairs in a one story building. |
I think, PGP- (or PGP-like) signing one's messages is the equivalent of "blue checkmarks" -- and everyone can decide for themselves, which PGP keys (or key-collections) they trust. This functionality is already found in NNTP-clients (such as Thunderbird), and it does not need to be part of the content-exchanging network itself. |
|
@UnitedMarsupials. Dang it, why didn't I think of that? I use PGP for email on the daily and SSH public/private keypairs for server access everywhere. This goes back to what you said earlier about not re-inventing the wheel. I fully agree if the technologies are available and work. With that, I am am now brainstorming about blending the following protocols and technologies together: NNTP, IPFS, DNSLink, PGP and blockchain. |
NNTP (including NNTP overs TLS) would be used by independent cooperating servers to exchange content posted to them by users. PGP could be used by some such end-users to validate messages posted by some other end-users -- or flag the fakes. This would be independent and separate from the servers exchanging content, and any underlying physical protocols (including that of the RFC1149) too. I don't understand, why you list the Interplanetary Filesystem and Blockchain -- except, perhaps, to add a certain levity to the conversation. |
|
Instead of hosting comments on servers, I was looking at IPFS. Blockchain to act as the ledger to track the most recent versions of each comment to display, as well as the voting up/down of each comment so people can sort them accordingly. Maybe it's possible to use IPFS directly for this as well, idk. I actually built a prototype from scratch before of a system to comment anywhere, as a plugin for the browser. The plugin worked in Firefox and Chrome without any issues. It injected a slide-out HTML/JS/CSS panel into the page so people can click a tab to reveal the comment section, which sent a hashed URL to a modified version of an open source commenting system hosted on my server. A shift to using IPFS for the commenting system would help take care of decentralization but doesn't address spam, illegal content, etc. There are still plenty of missing pieces of the puzzle, but it's a good brain excursive to think of how things can be implemented in a way that can also scale. I'm not throwing buzzwords out there for levity, though. These are technologies that seem to solve some of the issues I had been think about before. |
youre looking for orbitdb usually you want a compromise = federation -> pleroma, lemmy to use a federation of servers, you need a way to query multiple servers |
|
@UnitedMarsupials I'm taking the NNTP sidebar discussion to Dissenter with the Dissenter Lite plugin I made for Chrome-based browsers. |
|
I miss usenet. I can't even remember the point in time I stopped following it, or why. Usenet had tens of thousands of chat groups, but commenting on every page on the intenet would require billions of chat groups. I wonder if the NNTP infrastructure can cope with numbers that big. I suspect not, because it wasn't designed for it. I guess unless you shoehorned it in by combining every web site's comments into one group... or even everything into one group. Of course then you'd have tens of millions of comments in the one group, which might have its own problems. At what point would it be not making sense anymore trying to force a new idea into an existing protocol. An interesting idea that needs some research. The other thing is usenet, from my understanding, tended to be time based. Comments would expire after a certain time... presumably depending on how long your usenet provider wanted to keep them. I guess that would be ok for web page comment, but I think most people want a permanent record. Usenet feeds used to be pretty big, but now we're talking about multiplying by a million for all the web sites worthy of comment, and multiplying by eternity for how long they are kept. Then making that distributed so nothing is lost. With most of these peer to peer things there is some big players with deep pockets who can hold the master copies. |
|
Hey, awesome news - my plugin was accepted to the Microsoft Edge Add-ons store! If you know anyone who needs to be able to comment on things where commenting has been disabled, this is a great tool for them in Edge. |
|
related: https://web.hypothes.is/start/
example for this page: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13729525 → Ctrl+F for "filter"
https://web.hypothes.is/blog/annotation-is-now-a-web-standard/ not sure how "liberal" the filtering is on the main hypothes.is server, |
and others
Well dissenter is nearly officially dead, no programming or updates in nearly a year. Anyone have any plans to fork this and and bring the project back from the grave?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: