Natanael

No, this will only lead people without access to Google Play to be forced to get it from somebody who has modified the app to fake the check.

Bluesky does have federation, it's just limited for now. You can host your own accounts on your own hardware.

It pretends to be privacy focused, but because everything but 1-to-1 secret chats (where you have compared session identifiers) are accessible to the company and they keep logs of all group chats which they can access (even if they claim they can't, that's bullshit)

It depends on the type of location, small remote locations might not even get their own local network

They're not for long term storage, they're for transient storage like photography, in particular stuff like surveillance cameras

See also https://slrpnk.net/comment/10312933

What you're suggesting can't work

I sympathize with some of it, but you're going too far

Content addressable posts like what Bluesky's atproto does and cryptographic identity allows for portable posts and identities, and it even allows forkable communities as you can import and move entire conversations, and even mirror conversations that one team of mods may not like into another community (I made my first blog post about content addressable forums literally a whole decade ago)

And when posting to any /c/books the default visibility should be the same assuming a neutral reputation server and a neutral reputation user.

Literally impossible according to the CAP theorem (database terminology) in a decentralized network where not all servers federate with all (often because they just never have interacted and thus don't know of each other)

You have to push the communities to participate in multiple parallel communities, that's much more reliable. Together with a credible threat that the community can depose bad mod teams by forking, you have a much better chance of preventing bad mod behavior

You're basically suggesting bluesky style label services, except as the only solution

And no that can not be the only solution avaliable, ESPECIALLY not in communities around important topics like security, health, or for marginalized communities, etc. Your suggested default would be a trashfire by default until people have opted into some kind of moderation filters. And few will review the filters they subscribe to.

You also haven't solved the issue of how to get people to submit content to smaller communities

You have probably never seen a well moderated community, or at least not participated in one for long.

That already happens in the global popular feed though, I already see multiple variations of the same subs across different servers without subscribing.

Any shared agglomorated view based just on name needs to allow subs to opt out (I run /r/crypto on reddit, and it's for CRYPTOGRAPHY and I wished all the spammers would go and set themselves on fire) and you absolutely can not force it onto everybody.

You're also stuck with the same problem of less popular subs not getting many views because their content ends up last, because they don't have as big dedicated userbases, and because this just doesn't give them any increased visibility at all.

You also get an even worse problem of malicious servers faking high popularity to dominate (like when /r/T_D manipulated reddit) if you do it the naive way, every admin needs to filter bad servers. And new users won't know the best place to post to (usually the place with the most reliable mods). In fact they won't even understand why they're asked to choose, so they'll prefer what's listed at the top, probably their own server, and thus the .world server keeps dominating.

You also can't do thread deduplication without cooperating mods, so you get intense clutter. You also break apart sub specific culture if they get flooded by strangers.

The only way you can even get close to a sane implementation with your take is by putting a banner at the top of every thread in that view with the host sub description and the rules and forcing everybody to agree before interacting. Otherwise off topic content gets upvoted when it shouldn't, sub specific events gets ruined immediately, and people will get pissed when they get moderated under rules they should've read but didn't.

A hybrid view controlled mutually by mods allow you to advertise the different subs by highlighting their differences.

Honestly it shouldn't be either. Moderation requirements are too different and the direction and culture can be way too different.

Multi-subs is better when you have this big differences between subs and between servers and no guarantee that the same name means same content. And what mod/admin gets to take down what and where? Do all the server admins have to get involved to block spam threads submitted to other servers? How do you even know what others can see from the comment threads as a reader in a thread, when propagation and filters can be so different?

What we need is better multi-subs instead. Like having the ability for mods to publish officially approved multisubs, and for coordinating mod actions (like pushing removal suggestions, as a dedicated report moderation queue from trusted mod teams that's separate from normal reports).

The most complicated part here is deduplication of threads. That's easiest to deal with by detecting crossposts and showing them as a single view with comments from all crossposts across all participating subs.

It's a remote controlled web browser. It supports stuff like Netflix because the DRM support is maintained. When that stops it will get Blurayed and old players will fail to play new content

Or literally just reuse the Android TV name

That's what they did until OpenAI started making noise and management pushed out everybody working on safety and quality to cut corners and rush something out to compete (poorly)