So, it seems like PieFed is becoming a real alternative to lemmy.

What are the differences between these two? From a tech perspective, and also morality/ethics, if you want. Any differences in vision for these services?

Say whatever is on your mind. I want to know.

On which one should we put our weight?

PieFed all the way. It’s developing at lightning speed, while Lemmy lags behind as the transphobic genocide denying devs beg for donations with in built donation begging banners on all Lemmy instances front pages. Instances are apparently scared to defed from .ml for fear the devs wont support them with help.

Rimu has made some interesting choices, such as blocking 196 from default federating posts until a user subs first or a dislike for meme subs. But when spoken to has been receptive and removed such things or made them optional for admins.

Ethically and feature wise PieFed is in the lead, its not perfect but its open to change and receptive to ideas

  • goferking (he/him)
    10·
    5 days ago

    https://lemmy.ml/comment/23390349

    As I said initially, if every instance was Piefed - you wouldn’t be able to reply in the first place to someone who has blocked you. Whilst that interpretation of blocking could be disagreeable, it’s not what I consider ‘shadowbanning’ as you’re being directly blocked from interacting.

      • RedWizard [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
        9·
        4 days ago

        You haven’t created a bug, and you have it correct. If a Piefed user blocks a remote Piefed user, and that remote Piefed user attempts to reply to them in the UI this is what happens:

        • UI shows reply button regardless of block status (no template check)
        • Local routes check in_reply_to.author.has_blocked_user(current_user.id); fails if block known locally.
        • User blocks are not federated by PieFed, so local instance often unaware
        • If block unknown locally, reply is created and federated
        • Remote instance (where block exists) rejects reply via create_post_reply check, may send Delete activity back
        • Creates “ghost reply” scenario: appears locally but not on remote instance

        Piefed has no means of federating blocks. In fact, they have some TODOs to actually implement federated blocks:

        • No sending code: app/user/routes.py:811 has a TODO comment # federate block with placeholder ellipsis, and app/post/routes.py:1384 has a similar TODO.
        • Only moderation bans are federated: app/shared/tasks/blocks.py:ban_person sends Block activities exclusively for site/community bans, not user‑to‑user blocks.
        • Incoming blocks are handled: app/activitypub/routes.py:1520‑1526 processes incoming Mastodon‑style blocks (without a target field) and creates local UserBlock records, but there is no corresponding outgoing federation.

        So as it stands now, Lemmy and PieFed experience the exact same thing. I guess Piefed users just don’t notice.