IPv6 has temporary IPs for privacy reasons. NAT is NOT a firewall. Setting up a real firewall is more secure and gives you more control without things like UPNP and NAT-PMP.

I don't see how they can recover from that. They will get lawsuits from all around the world.

IPv6 changed some things. First and foremost it has a huge address space:

• IPv4: 4294967296 (2^32)
• IPv6: 340282366920938463463374607431768211456 (2^128)

Then they simplyfied some things:

• Removed Broadcast in favor of Multicast and Anycast
• Added autoconfiguration without a DHCP server
• Better subnetting support

And much more

Yes. If you don't connect it is pretty dumb and shouldn't be able to send your data for harvesting. You sould research if you can set it to one of the outputs permanently then you can use some external device that you trust.

I am not a 100% sure I understand your setup but it shouldn't be possible to add a Kernel module in a container. The container uses the Kernel of the host and doesn't have a Kernel on its own.

The userbase is not that important with activity pub. If the features are good they can grow slowly and still enjoy the whole fediverse. Of course it is important to have users at all. Otherwise it doesn't make sense to put work on the software.

Looks delicious. Do you want to share you recipe if you have one.

Ich habe mein Datenmüllarchiv beantragt, runtergeladen und dann mein Konto gelöscht.

I read a proposal for the ActivityPub spec for shared groups. It means that a group can essentially be hosted from two instances together. But AFAIK the proposal is not yet approved and it needs to be implemented in lemmy for it to work. Right now a community is gone if the instance is gone.

Putting the onus on me is a shitty thing to do

You are the person who has a problem with that and you mentioned FOSS. It is easy to complain. FOSS gives you the tools to change things. But you have to put in the work. You are the one putting the burden the change something to your liking on others instead of doing to yourself.

Obfuscating user IDs via a hash or something would seem like the way to make it work. I’m not a coder, so I have no idea if I’m talking nonsense on that front. And whilst still not an ideal solution, but sharing non-private votes with your own instance admin and have them share only the total vote count with other instances is another solution. That way you need only trust your instance admin, which is choosable and can also be yourself.

Both of your ideas are not compatible with ActivityPub as far is I can see. So you first need to change the specification and then make everyone adopt the specification. Before that any change would make your software incompatible with the rest of fediverse which is counter the idea.

And all of that because people could be mad about a downvote. I am an instance admin. I was downvoted before. I never even thought about looking up who downvoted me. I know people are different but to be honest if someone looks it up and harasses you then you block them. And I really can't imagine that your vote on a post with a pseudonym is really a very useful datapoint for anyone.

I agree that these things have to be communicated better but I don't even know how we would make people aware of this. No one reads disclaimers.

If you want privacy you need to use an encrypted chat. You can't have privacy in a public space. That is like stand in the middle of a market place, screaming out your thoughts and then being upset that someone writes them down. It sure would be nice if our data wasn't harvested, but that is not the world we live in. So if you want to say something in private you need to choose a private platform. Otherwise assume that Big Tech and World Governments are listening.

The captcha code is merged but there is no release candidate yet. Probably only @dessalines knows.