freamon
Is this where that happens?
Yeah. That function is for adding instances as they are encountered. Your dev server won't initially know about any other instances ('trusted' or not), but as soon as it engages with anything from 'piefed.social', then it will get added to the instance list and the 'trusted' flag will be set to True
piefed.social is hard-coded in the source as a 'trusted instance', so other PieFed instances won't ever send votes to it using alternative profiles. Untrusted instances that receive traffic from PieFed instances will end up generating one row for the main user, and one row for the alt user. It's typically only one extra row (per user), but I think that unticking and ticking 'Vote privately' in settings generates a new random username for the alt everytime, so it could end up being more.
Dept. Q on Netflix is pretty good - it's one of those 'modern Sherlock & Holmes get their own department in a disused basement to investigate cold cases' type shows.
I've complained about the 'trusted instance concept' too ... I've a horrible feeling that it exists to protect piefed.social from the DB bloat it inflicts on everyone else, lol.
It doesn't, no. The bot gets its data from another bot, at https://lemmyverse.net/, which only crawls Lemmy and MBIN instances at the mo.
We'd either need to send a PR to get that bot to crawl PieFed instances too, or just replicate the functionality from the same machine that runs 'tcbot'. Communities would also need to provide their 'active users / month' too. It's just the subscriber count currently, but it shouldn't be too much of a problem hopefully.
I'm now concerned that I've unfairly brought PieFed into all this. It's not my project, and it will continue to thrive irrespective of how much I do or don't contribute to it.
I do, however, think that cm0002's current project is doomed. The idea that the admins of Lemmy instances of any significant size will defed from ML on the promise that one person will continue to be willing and able to replicate missing content, presumably forever, is not one I can foresee succeeding. If the admins of lemmy.ml weren't also the devs, then maybe, but otherwise no.
It was this approach that I was attempting to criticize, not any fundamental political disagreements.
I think people are already aware, but if not, the OpenAPI docs are at https://freamon.github.io/piefed-api
I know that the 'Try It Out' commands work for the first server, but I don't know about the other 2 (piefed.social and feddit.online), because it's a whole thing with setting up CORS.
I'd be wary of getting a conversation node from anybody other than the original author (as described in the second approach).
There's a reason why, if you want to resolve a missing post in Lemmy, etc, you have to use the fedi-link to retrieve it from its source, not just from any other instance that has a copy (because, like the "context owner", they could be lying).
For Group-based apps, conversation backfill is mostly an issue for new instances, who might have a community's posts (from its outbox), but will be missing old comments. Comments can be automatically and recursively retrieved when they are replied to or upvoted by a remote actor, but fetching from the source (as you arguably should do) is complicated by instances closing (there's still loads of comments from feddit.de and kbin.social out there - it will be much worse when lemm.ee disappears). So perhaps Lemmy could also benefit from post authors being considered the trusted owner of any comments they receive.