bleepbloopbop [they/them]

  • 0 Posts
  • 7 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
Cake day: October 14th, 2021
  • bleepbloopbop [they/them]@hexbear.nettoLemmy@lemmy.ml•Is this somehow an intentional choice or a feature? I consider it insane ...English
    3·
    7 months ago

    You assume I’m not contributing … based on what?

    Based on the fact I haven’t seen your handle contribute to the github, which I follow relatively closely. Not to mention from your question’s phrasing, and lack of research beforehand, I could have surmised as much. A contributor probably would have been able to find the relevant discussion on the github and read it rather than just badmouthing the software in a post.

    I agree, RobotToaster thought through their reply and came with ideas that might actually work, at least in their second comment, not just complaining “why isn’t this already the way I want it??”

  • bleepbloopbop [they/them]@hexbear.nettoLemmy@lemmy.ml•Is this somehow an intentional choice or a feature? I consider it insane ...English
    6·
    7 months ago

    Nope. I highlighted the app only because it’s an existing, working solution that an individual can use today. It is not a great solution for obvious reasons. I for one only browse via lemmy-ui, so that app does precisely nothing for me. My intention wasn’t to poo-poo possible solutions, but to push back on your entitled framing implying that it was such an easy problem that it must have been an intentional omission to leave it out. Other users had no problem conversing with me in good faith and not being so hostile. I agree it’s an issue, and so do the Lemmy devs, it just hasn’t been solved yet.

    I don’t care about your contribution to the thread, I mean you aren’t contributing to Lemmy, the codebase, and so my patience for such a level of hostility and complaining is low.

  • bleepbloopbop [they/them]@hexbear.nettoLemmy@lemmy.ml•Is this somehow an intentional choice or a feature? I consider it insane ...English
    21·
    7 months ago

    how exactly […]

    Sure, UUIDs are a useful tool. What of it? If I put a UUID in a comment, it isn’t a link. This doesn’t answer my question or solve the problem. The link has to go somewhere on the web, or use a custom protocol specifier and be handled by a client application or something installed on the user’s machine. If you go the client app route, many/maybe even most people use lemmy in a browser at least some of the time, and this will never get the full adoption required to make it standard. If you go the web link route, then you have concerns like “who owns the domain/service that does the redirecting” (ie matrix.to), can they be trusted, how can they automatically tell which instance to send users to without privacy concerns?

    If you’re proposing overhauling the whole architecture of lemmy to use consistent UUID-based IDs for comments, posts, etc. across all instances, that could probably work but there are some edge cases especially with malicious actors, and it would be a huge undertaking.

    A better idea, IMO, is to let client apps/frontends handle the translation, so that regardless of what instance the comment is linked on, it is translated to the correct local link for local users (unless the instances aren’t federated), since there’s already the fedilink button to then see the post on the original user’s instance, but there are probably edge cases and performance issues I’m not thinking of/privy to, and its still a non-trivial fix, which is why it hasn’t happened yet. I’m sure the devs would welcome such a change if a PR were submitted with the kinks worked out, but it isn’t on their current priorities list afaik