The fediverse is already, by itself, designed to be a framework for this exact thing.

The problems we have, and are always going to have, are that not all pieces of backend software have the same functionality. For example, you can already follow Lemmy communities and users from Mastodon, but not the other way round. If one backend implements some piece of functionality (e.g. upvoting/downvoting), then all backends that haven’t implemented it are going to be incomplete in how they can interact with it. It’s not possible to implement every conceivable functionality in all backends, that would actually kinda defeat the purpose of having different backends.

As for your idea of “fediverse-wide SSO”: there already is an open standard for SSO called OpenID. Fediverse instances could be OpenID providers if that’s desired. But that’s still a separate thing from ActivityPub.

I don’t see anything wrong with using AI for almost anything at all (including this), as long as there is human review every time. I do not see how the free software philosophy, by itself, either endorses or condemns AI.

OK, I wasn’t familiar with that term; TIL. Again, it’s not terminology I would personally have used; calling it a “fascist creed” over that still sounds like an exaggeration.

“Heritage is duty” refers to the heritage of computing, not of human beings. Completely non-outrageous in context.

“Command is service”, ok, that explains why Omarchy isn’t a democracy. I think many other FOSS projects aren’t either, so I don’t see anything outrageous in that either.

And you may of course disagree with their opinion on “Code-of-Conduct struggle sessions and identity-overload nonsense” (not words I would have used). Many completely well-meaning people hold different opinions on those topics.

So, how would your ideal social media platform decide what to show to the user in what priority?

I use Mastodon with a chronological feed and it works very well for me. I check it every few hours or even minutes during waking hours (depending on how bored I am) and get a huge share of my news that way. Most of my activity here on Lemmy is posting articles I discover through that exact feed.

But of course, the context here is a certain bill introduced in Australia, to which the correct response would be more similar to this article: https://www.freezenet.ca/what-the-media-didnt-tell-you-about-the-australian-off-switch-bill/

Congratulations, you’ve just managed to advertise the exact thing you oppose. I would likely have given zero attention or thought to Omarchy today if I hadn’t seen this thread.

Also, I just read that “The Omarchy Doctrine” page; if someone seriously thinks that is a “fascist creed”, then that is very interesting. About the person who thinks that. If someone could help me figure out what part of that is supposed to be outrageous or especially controversial, I’d appreciate any help!

What part of that surprised you?

EFF is a digital rights organization. Copyright was one of the earliest threats to digital rights that people were aware of. In the 2000s, it was generally thought of as the main threat, which is why at the time, political parties called “Pirate Parties” were formed around the world, which were all about digital rights.

So it’s completely expected that EFF would take sides against copyright holders. In fact I agree with them on that.

How ironic that you posted this and thus caused people to talk about the technology you want to give no attention to.

Revenue so far: $0

and let us hope it stays that way

Haven’t heard of anything about this being done on a device level.

Then you simply missed a few news stories:

• https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jun/08/starmer-tech-firms-ultimatum-block-explicit-images-children-phones from 3 months ago
• https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2026/09/government-look-to-impose-mandatory-age-verification-on-uk-smartphones.html from today

This is why countries need constitutions that limit what laws governments are allowed to pass. This is approximately the prototype of something governments just shouldn’t be allowed to ever do.

Yes. JOSM is pretty much the default editor for serious mappers, by far the one that most effort has gone into to make it powerful.

because these politicians know extremely little about the Internet

I started participating in online communities in the 2000s. The “social media” we had back then was web forums, organized by topics and sorted chronologically. I was young enough at the time that it is now permanently stored in my brain that that is the normal way the Internet should be like, and everything popularized since then (recommendation algorithms, the idea that we should follow people instead of topics, even the idea that websites shouldn’t be specific to certain topics) is a deviation from normalcy.

I know, rationally, that those deviations from normalcy are now the new normal (even the fediverse is “only” an attempt to improve further on that, not a move toward the Internet of the 2000s), but there is still a part of my brain that doesn’t accept this.

But I very strongly suspect that those politicians, in Australia and elsewhere, who are now trying to regulate the Internet, never posted anything to a traditional web forum, or edited a wiki, or anything like that. To them, “social media” became a thing (at all!) in around 2008 to 2010 when they created Twitter and Facebook accounts in order to communicate with their voters. (Reality check: social media has been a thing since, at the latest, the 1980s, when Usenet was invented.)

If they don’t know that the Internet is not Facebook, then it’s unsurprising when they regulate the internet as if it’s all just Facebook, so that all that will be left is Facebook. Sad times we are living in.

I don’t know if that’s true if they don’t publish a list of that. I certainly wouldn’t know how.

Yes. I have seen comments before from obscure instances that didn’t seem to be open to the public. It wouldn’t really make much technical sense to prevent that.

this, and also: what exactly is the question?!

If the Lemmy instance isn’t public anyway, then it seems like its federation list doesn’t have to be public either, so other instance admins would have no way of knowing what such an instance federates with.

apparently you cared enough to write a comment about it

Hopefully. I am already on both sites (though on reddit I hardly ever start new threads and only use it on desktop) and would love getting opportunities to talk about all the topics here that I currently talk about only on reddit.

It is so incredible. I used to think the main threat to a free and open Internet was copyright. Then in the mid-2010s the talking points against it shifted to misinformation and hate speech.

Now it’s age verification? How did we get here?

Why does any military, anywhere, allow any software on its devices that it doesn’t have the source code for, including ability to compile and modify it?! Disabling “advertising trackers” is a small first step, yeah…

Huh I guess that really makes me think