Lemmy is designed so that you can curate your feed rather than view everything anyone sends.

Maybe make it a monthly thing on the first or last day of the month?

I'm a bit biased but I like !eric_posts_urls@discuss.online

You've been doing great with that community, I hope more people get in there.

Your a victim of your success, it seems.

I didn't realize kbin.social went offline.

How's your project going? Are you finding any tradeoffs you made stand out as especially worthwhile or something you'd choose differently if you started over (perhaps something you're planning to change)?

This suggestion seems to be a bit different from what you implemented on piedfed. I'm having trouble articulating it though. Something more like a feed of user defined subset of subscribed communities/topics.

AT protocol doesn't federate the way ActivityPub does. There are separations between how your dat is stored, how it is aggregated, how it is filtered, and how it is displayed. Each part can be hosted separately and federate differently with separate instances of each part. The aggregation part is the thing that is most critical and there are probably some limited independent instances of that, but BlueSky has offered no support in facilitating this beyond making their peices AT Protocol compliant. You van take what BlueSky built and try to run your own instance of the aggregation service but they provide no documentation or support. You could also build your own, but that's difficult and I don't think anyone is trying.

So it is federated, but pretty much no one is interested in doing the work to federate with the primary infrastructure.

Yeah I'm not disappointed to see this instance close up.

Theirs is a "Loli/Shota/Cub Friendly" instance according to their sidebar. That's why they aren't federated with many instances.

The default UI is how most new users will experience interacting with lemmy instances at first. So it's helpful to create a better first impression. To the extent that this is built into the project itself makes it easier for other UIs to be created and maintained too.

I believe that the Lemmy devs are working on a better url scheme for posts and comments as well. This will also make it less annoying without any browser extension, script, or other third part service.

I generally agree with you.

However, I want to encourge you to consider softening up your replies to people who you don't have a strong prior social connection with. I've started making an effort to do that and I've found that I'm having more rewarding conversations now.

That's very different from what I think people generally want by default, which is that when you're on lemmy.world, it's because that's your home instance and any links to other instances would be automatically converted to the lenmy.world version of the post or comment by default (as long as the two instances are federated).

Anyone that wants more could find a browser plugin or script, but every new user with an account of any instance would have an initial experience that's much less confusing and more consistent and pleasant.

It's not implimented because the developers of lemmy have been prioritizing other issues and features. They say they're open to code contributions, so someone would have to volunteer to do it.

Why would you need another site's browser cookies?

The people who are in charge of collecting donations and deciding how those funds are used absolutely have power that can be used to exert control.

The caníbals are in the kitchen and now have control which can be used to decide on the procurement of food.

It shouldn't. I'm not sure what I can do to change it.

I've got bad news for you about cars being sold over the last 15 years.

For $24 a month I can keep you safe from the worst ones.

For those that are questioning what the point of the lengthy article is because the title doesn't help much, here's the explanation:

Imagine it this way: let’s say every time you stepped outside your front door, you decided you want to be safe, so you dressed head-to-toe in full combat gear, complete with bulky full-body kevlar, a helmet, safety glasses, steel-toed boots, and gloves. I can stop the scenario here: even for those of us living in the roughest places, that’s a silly visual because it’s overkill. To be a little detailed, it also goes back to that word I used: “you want to be safe.” Safe from what? The sun? Then just put on some sunscreen and a hat. The cold? Put on a jacket. Danger? Keep your eyes up, headphones out (or low), and be aware of your surroundings.

Yet, many of us do the equivalent of overdressing in our digital lives because, as I said, we don’t always see it right away. Most people can instantly tell when they might be putting on too many items of clothing. Even something as simple as a jacket – when you feel the weight and restriction of movement – makes you pause enough to go “how cold is it really outside?” With the digital world, it can be much harder to notice the added weight, at least for a while. This makes it easier to overdress and not notice for a long time – or to dress up in full armor except for going barefoot (like I said, inconsistent action). In the past, I’ve compared some of the easier cybersecurity strategies with locking your front door: it’s technically inconvenient but we accept that inconvenience because the dramatic increase in security and safety outweighs it. This is comparable to things like using a password manager and 2FA or making the upfront switching cost to another service.

...

Once [people] understand the concept, they quickly start to realize where they can safely dial back to something less stressful without risking themselves and where they should instead focus more attention to improve. You don’t need the entire suit of body armor, you just need to put on a jacket.