Gregory's Server@Gargron Almost seems like very large instances are not such a great idea 🤔 We should try something like decentralization...
|
23 comments
@stanford @moanos_foss @Gargron 😂 all the experience with large social networks speak loud and clear for 1 central instance (and expensive APIs) @moanos_foss yes dezentralisation prevent spam. we saw that with emails. @Hughenknubbel @Gargron Depends. It's easy to block one server (when it is not "to big to block"). And problems never affect the whole network. @moanos_foss @Hughenknubbel so you would just block an instance that is targeted by spam abusers? :schmusekadser: @SolSoCoG @Hughenknubbel Yes until they solved the issue. We (lediver.se) also limit mastodon.social for the time being. But a smaller instance would make less problems @moanos_foss @SolSoCoG @Hughenknubbel But it has different problems https://mastodon.social/@nhan/110222576212477948. @moanos_foss That's just gonna make your users having hard time to communicate with his friend at that blocked instance.
@moanos_foss @Hughenknubbel @Gargron how about when it is "to big to block"? And why can't they spam the whole network? Obtaining a list of accounts as they're doing now and just... spam like email? @moanos_foss there must be only one Docker Container Script, that setting up Mastodon instances automatically with random users while sleeping and federating some time and you will have the same problems. @gargron @Hughenknubbel Nope, you need domains to do that, they are at least somewhat expensive (you can block a root domain and all subdomains) @Hughenknubbel Bu you still have to pay it. And I guess domain registrars also have anti-spam measures (as they also have to deal with the outfall). So while not bullet-proof it's much better. My stolen credit card number this past weekend had 8 transactions (over an hour) on it before the fraud detect at the bank took action. Average transaction was $20 USD. Funding is not a problem for a determined mal-actor.  @Hughenknubbel Email didn't have as effective antiabuse measures, and what did get implemented tended to be terrible (like reject on DNSBL). @BalooUriza nothing prevent spammers to setting up thousend of micro instances. @Hughenknubbel There isn't, no, but, that's easily relatively easily mitigated since it's harder to set that up across multiple ASNs. But it does avoid the "overcrowded, undermoderated" problem large instances tend to have. @Hughenknubbel @moanos_foss @Gargron decentralization doesn't prevent spam as an only step. but it's certainly a valid approach along with other mitigations. one big juicy centralized target vs many different smaller ones that can intervene at their interface  @Hughenknubbel @moanos_foss @Gargron weirdly bad faith reply given that the domain of the email world has been completely overtaken by large instances  @moanos_foss@lediver.se @Gargron@mastodon.social this is not their choice, mostly, its newer users @moanos_foss Many tiny instances is also not a good idea unless each admin has the resources (time, energy, & money) to commit to monitoring for and fighting against spam and other nasties. However, an intentional dividing of a large instance like this one into multiple small/medium instances, ensuring each is sufficiently moderated, could be a good idea. But then there are other considerations, like orchestrating user migrations and such which seems like it could be difficult to do correctly. @moanos_foss at the end of the day it's probably easier and cheaper to just scale countermeasures against spam and harmful content on a mega instance rather than go through the effort of subdividing. But I don't have any experience hosting an instance so, take my opinion with a huge grain of salt. :) |
@moanos_foss @Gargron Decental... what?
Are you suggesting having more than one default #mastodon instance?
What a revolutionary idea 🎉​