Brought to you by the Department of Erasing History.

  • redcalciumEnglish
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    0
    ·
    5 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    Due to how federation works, downvotes are actually somewhat public because instance owners can query them in lemmy database, though instance owners probably won’t tell you if you ask due to privacy reason. If you’re interested in something like this, you can run your own instance.

    • Dark ArcEnglish
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      5 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      Yeah, it’s actually a bit creepy.

      Federated voting in general seems like it could use some rethinking to enable private voting but also to protect against vote manipulation. Right now the fediverse is arguably incredibly vulnerable to vote manipulation campaigns.

      • fuckwit_mcbumcrumbleEnglish
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        Open (and distributed) and private are two very difficult things to intermingle. You can mitigate some issues, but at the end of the day the two ideas have to butt against each other.

        • laurelravenEnglish
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          I hate to suggest it but I wonder if a blockchain would work here

          • fuckwit_mcbumcrumbleEnglish
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            0
            ·
            5 months ago
            link
            fedilink

            Blockchains are the antithesis of anonymity. Pseudo anonymity isn’t anonymity, it just doesn’t scream your name out there from the get go.

          • capitalEnglish
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            0
            ·
            5 months ago
            link
            fedilink

            What aspect of the points mentioned in the thread do you feel are addressed by blockchain?

            • laurelravenEnglish
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              0
              ·
              5 months ago
              edit-2
              5 months ago
              link
              fedilink

              Openly distributed while being private(-ish; I know blockchains aren’t truly private but it could at least obfuscate it adequately against casual or semi serious attempts to identify someone)

              I’ll admit I’m no expert or even particularly well versed in blockchain technologies, but my (limited) understanding of them suggests this might actually be the kind of thing it’s good at (as opposed to how it could seemingly do anything a few years ago and everyone was trying to shoehorn a blockchain into their products)

              And to underline part of my comment, I did say “I wonder if rather than asserting that it would work or even that I bet it would work

              • capitalEnglish
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                0
                ·
                5 months ago
                link
                fedilink

                Fedi technologies are already distributed. That’s literally what federation is about.

                Blockchain isn’t private by default although some have gone that direction. Bitcoin, for example, is pseudonymous - all transactions are public to the world though no tx is tied to an identity on chain.

                Any privacy features you’re imagining can be built for a blockchain solution to this problem could be built into a “normal”, web 2.0, federated solution that would be far less expensive to run, resource-wise.

                It’s almost always the case that when someone comes up with blockchain as the solution to some problem, they mean distributed or maybe self-hosted. Neither of which requires a blockchain.

                Check out videos involving crypto on the Cartoon Avatar’s youtube channel such as this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xq721IAqBo&t.

            • laurelravenEnglish
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              0
              ·
              5 months ago
              link
              fedilink

              Yeah, I’d imagine not, though I’m fairly confident any solution to this would be nontrivial

              • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                0
                ·
                5 months ago
                link
                fedilink

                Fair point. Blockchain might be the quickest to implement just because the infrastructure is already established, even if it’s not trivial. Not sure, though.

      • afraid_of_zombiesEnglish
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        I want the ability to see who down votes what but don’t want to have other people see that about me. Ha

      • r3df0x ✡️✝☪️English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        0
        ·
        5 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        I was wondering about this. If they didn’t keep track of who is voting, manipulation would be easier then it already is. The problem is that rogue instance admins could make votes public.

        • Dark ArcEnglish
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          One possible answer is to allow anyone to see votes categorized by instance, so you know where they’re originating from.

          Small/single user instances could be aggregated together/anonymized or maybe that’s just the price you pay for having a single user instance.

    • LucidlethargyEnglish
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      5 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      I think this is public information on some services. Not Lemmy, but other federated services.