The problem:

The web has obviously reached a high level of #enshitification. Paywalls, exclusive walled gardens, #Cloudflare, popups, CAPTCHAs, tor-blockades, dark patterns (esp. w/cookies), javascript that makes the website an app (not a doc), etc.

Status quo solution (failure):

#Lemmy & the #threadiverse were designed to inherently trust humans to only post links to non-shit websites, and to only upvote content that has no links or links to non-shit venues.

It’s not working. The social approach is a systemic failure.

The fix:

  • stage 1 (metrics collection): There needs to be shitification metrics for every link. Readers should be able to click a “this link is shit” button on a per-link basis & there should be tick boxes to indicate the particular variety of shit that it is.

  • stage 2 (metrics usage): If many links with the same hostname show a pattern of matching enshitification factors, the Lemmy server should automatically tag all those links with a warning of some kind (e.g. ⚠, 💩, 🌩).

  • stage 3 (inclusive alternative): A replacement link to a mirror is offered. E.g. youtube → (non-CF’d invidious instance), cloudflare → archive.org, medium.com → (random scribe.rip instance), etc.

  • stage 4 (onsite archive): good samaritans and over-achievers should have the option to provide the full text for a given link so others can read the article without even fighting the site.

  • stage 5 (search reranking): whenever a human post a link and talks about it, search crawlers notice and give that site a high ranking. This is why search results have gotten lousy – because the social approach has failed. Humans will post bad links. So links with a high enshitification score need to be obfuscated in some way (e.g. dots become asterisks) so search crawlers don’t overrate them going forward.

This needs to be recognized as a #LemmyBug.

  • activistPnkOP
    1·
    9 months ago

    Your feature is only going to be accepted on Github, but you’re whining about using that too.

    The code submission does not require /me/ to be on Github, only the developer. The bug report need not be on GH either.

    You’ve chosen none of the three options, which is why I said you just want to complain here

    That’s non sequitur logic. These arbitrary options were only just presented in the same post you attempted to frame my bug report as “bitching”. My rejection of your silly options came after that thus cannot serve as rationale for saying “you just want to complain here”. Even if your mental timeline were not screwed up, the logic still wouldn’t follow. Rejecting your silly options is not a complaint – just a statement that your ideas are a non-starter.

    Go actually do something if you want it done.

    You’ve neglected to back your own implied claim that PRs would be accepted, so doubling down on that idea doesn’t really make sense here.

    Oh, I guess there’s an option 4. Go fork Lemmy and build it yourself,

    There’s the first viable option you’ve mentioned. Congrats. Of course this is outside the scope of the bug report as it misses the point of how bug reports serve the quality process. This bug report serves no purpose if I fork it myself.

    • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.techEnglish
      1·
      9 months ago

      Wonderful. I’m glad you’ve opted for Option 4. Now, go actually do something instead of expecting others to do it for you. You want to be a part of Lemmy’s development process? I’ll see you on Github, otherwise I look forward to you releasing your own fork.