What is the fh did I just read

  • jherazob@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    OK, let’s check the status of that today:

    As an aside, the politics of the Lemmy creators are still mentioned a lot, but at this point the tankie population has been pretty much utterly outnumbered due to the Reddit migration, Lemmy has grown from a few hundred people to thousands and is STILL growing, hopefully it’s no longer an issue.

    • AnonStoleMyPants@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Hey, you wanna give more context to point 3? I only found comments regarding that delete will spread but the servers can (though should not I guess) just replace the deleted object with a “Tombstone” object and thus not really delete.

      • jherazob@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m busy right now, will look for the exact code snippets later, but in summary from what i read earlier when i first came across these claims last month or so, any activity that happens with a comment is also federated: Creation, editing and deletion, so barring any cache that will eventually expire, or an instance going down, the lifetime of a message will be replicated across anything that federates with it.

        And yes, a patched instance could just ignore deletion and save everything, but at that point you’re fighting a rogue element and the rules change, we’re discussing the normal, designed behavior of the software.

        • AnonStoleMyPants@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah I understand that of course a random instance could just change the code so that nothing is deleted. However, what I meant is that in the documentation states that the instance can use this Tombstone instead of deleting and it seems like it is completely “fine” and within the rules to do so. I am referring to this:

          … the server receiving the delete activity SHOULD remove its representation of the object with the same id, and MAY replace that representation with a Tombstone object.

          From https://www.w3.org/TR/activitypub/#delete-activity-inbox

          So they should do it but it is also OK to use this different thing. Or am I misunderstanding this comment and it means that instances need to delete the object, and after the fact it is allowed for instances to furthermore make this Tombstone to somehow track that yes there was a deleted object here?