cross-posted from: https://piefed.social/c/piefed_meta@piefed.social/p/2603915/piefed-v1-9-is-released-shared-blocklists-auto-bans-and-totp
New features
- Shared blocklists - these are like feeds except instead of listing communities to join it lists people to block. To to Account -> Blocklists to find this feature. Changes by the blocklist author effect all the people who subscribe to the list, causing them to block the list members. They federate, so you can subscribe to blocklists on other instances.
- Edit comments inline, without loading a separate page - wjs018
- Fediverse statistics at https://piefed.social/statistics
- 2-factor authentication (TOTP) - can be added to your account in the ‘Security’ page in your settings.
For admins
- Auto-ban based on the bans that instances you choose, with keyword matching on the ban reason. Go to /admin/users/auto_ban. Try putting ‘piefed.social’ in as the instance and ‘spam’ as the keyword filter. It’ll cut down on the work involved in running your instance SO much.
- Voting pattern graph on user profiles to help spot automated voting.
- Reset the password of any user.
- Lots of inauthentic behaviour reports for finding bots and serial downvoters, see /admin/votes and PM me for an instructional video. It’s a lot to take in but the video will explain it all.
API
- edit matrix user id when saving user profile data.
- scheduled post endpoints - wjs018
Plus a lot more bits and pieces, browse the list of recent releases in the 1.8.x line at https://codeberg.org/rimu/pyfedi/releases for details.
To upgrade from 1.8.x or earlier
git pull
git checkout v1.9.x
Then,
./deploy.sh or ./deploy-docker2.sh
Donations
PieFed is free and open-source software while operating without any advertising, monetization, or reliance on venture capital. Your donations are vital in supporting the PieFed development effort, allowing us to expand and enhance PieFed with new features.
Shared blocklists - these are like feeds except instead of listing communities to join it lists people to block. To to Account -> Blocklists to find this feature. Changes by the blocklist author effect all the people who subscribe to the list, causing them to block the list members. They federate, so you can subscribe to blocklists on other instances.
Maybe an unpopular opinion, but I have mixed feelings about the social/community implications of shared block lists.
It’s essentially social blacklisting, and while it gives people more options for controlling what they see, I’m not entirely convinced it’s healthy compared to manual blocking of users and servers on an individual level.
Yes I expect it will be a mixed bag. But we all know how much blocking new people need to do to make this place livable so hopefully this will help people get to that state quicker.
I don’t feel that strongly about it. I think I just blocked Lemmy.ml and dbzero or whatever the hell it’s called.
Auto ban sounds terrifying and definitely won’t be abused
PyLova already had this feature, does PieFeds work with it or is it breaking Fediverse compatibility?
Funny how PieFed gets multiple images in posts, and now in-line comment editing/shared blocklists after PyLova introduces it. Does PieFed have any original ideas?
Sharing of ideas and code is a core tenant of FOSS. PyLova literally started as a copy of Piefed. Why shouldn’t the ideas and features flow both ways?
Multiple images in posts and in-line comment editing are basic features coppied from Reddit (and, like, every social media site), which probably coppied them from somewhere else. Let’s not pretend like PyLova is breaking new ground here, lmao.
These are only being added straight after PyLova does it. And considering Rimu’s hostile history it’s clearly an attempt to try to ensure PyLova cannot gain traction with its own unique feature sets.
And the way they are being added is not compatible with PyLova’s methods. Which breaks Fediverse compatibility. If any software such as Lemmy were to implement it in the future they would most likely ensure compatibility with the larger userbase PieFed model.
This is the similar to Microsoft’s “Embrace, extend, and extinguish” philosophy to kill off the competition.
Do you have any context/source for “Rimu’s hostile history”? Because I’ve tried looking into that a few times but I’ve only ever found this Piefed devlog post which makes Piefed sound reasonable but obviously has every incentive to be biased.
I don’t want to get too off-topic here, so I’ll message you.
Why shouldn’t the ideas and features flow both ways?
why doesn’t @rimu@piefed.social admit that he got the ideas from Mia then? why copy changes from PyLova, and strip attribution, then admit to MrKaplan that he did it so that she wouldn’t be attributed? moth supposes that perhaps he does not want to admit Piefed is inferior to PyLova.
Let’s not pretend like PyLova is breaking new ground here, lmao.
no, but PyLova IS doing most of the dev work for Piefed.
If you love pylova so much why don’t you just marry it?
that’s a good idea, thank you! moth thinks marriage is an outdated concept, but moth might find it agreeable if it’s to the best threadiverse software currently available!
Its a fork isn’t it? So like 95℅ of the codes the same.
The fork split off 7 months ago, PyLova independently added these features weeks and months before PieFed ever did.
And it has now been confirmed that Rimu has made it non-compatible.
I’ll take a look later. It should have a tiny bit my code in there.
