https://instances.joinpeertube.org/instances/stats
Yesterday it was arround 850 000 or 870 000.
Now it’s at 47 070 789
Someone on an instance might have found how to change the views of a video. Making this federation statistic unusable for now.
Where is the bug tracker for this? https://instances.joinpeertube.org/instances/stats
I can’t find it.
Fixed: https://framagit.org/chocobozzz/instances-peertube/commit/26c87152d187a524fe9be29cc5d51328a45f5637
The server can lie about everything? Shocking. Truly shocking.
That wasn’t a surprise. This post was a report with the aim of excluding the problematic instance from the stats. Of course the system can still be gamed (and will be). But meanwhile we can still use it to get useful info about the federation.
Thanks spf, would having stats history help detecting further (naive) instances of stat fraud?
yes number of view can be changed by instance owner.
I see content value more than any google analytics alike, i did choose peertube because it is non merchant federation. For me GAFAM took market with very ugly practices we should not try to reproduce. I don’t want to take market, i just want to produce freely.
(reworded, apologize for previous show off ) I don’t remember where i have engaged my responsability of instance owner to not modify numbers when adding to joinpeertube.org.
If i had to i would perhaps have raised some concern.
And yes i assume this late fraud : https://pire.artisanlogiciel.net/videos/watch/08470484-3b3a-40da-b318-220d9ab90714 for educational purposes. And i will continue from time to time to hack into this to discover limit right now, before other people with money driven soul do it.
Additionaly stat change can somehow be legit, if by exemple one video is migrated from one instance to another and view changed to keep history.
I am not focused on number of view, quality content of a video is not necessary linked to its number of view, in particular when it addresses very specific topics.
ihmo view based consumption is really a pity and a bias coming from google, for sur most view will come for copyrighted content like movies not created or even modified by poster, this in no case is my interest in peertube.
I might even want a system that does not advertise views.
Given your short answer it seems that gaming with numbers does hurt what i didn’t expect, so removing my video.
It remains that we should have an alternate federated system where all tests on real scale should be driven.
And BTW Is that blacklist automatic or manual ?
There is a need of explicit rules and gouvernance for joinpeertube.org , please give me link to where those blacklisting rules are defined , and perhaps we should open a forum subject to discuss this topic.
I don’t find that in https://github.com/Chocobozzz/PeerTube/blob/develop/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md , and this apply to contributors not necessary to instance owners.
I find even less in https://framagit.org/chocobozzz/instances-peertube/blob/develop/README.md .
The closest thing i find is within https://github.com/Chocobozzz/PeerTube/blob/develop/SECURITY.md :
‘Avoid violating the privacy of others, disrupting our systems, destroying data, and/or harming user experience.’
So here ‘harming user experience’ this is a quite vague or wide topic. Having a slow instance is already harming user experience.
I really dislike the idea of harming community, i did those videos to show limitation, for eductational purpose and to raise awarness, not as a script kiddy for disrupting system.
And as many of people involved in free software community i have a very strong need of liberty and of open discussion, what i am waiting for here.
This is not a good sign. The whole point to PeerTube is that no one should be able to control what content you post on it. I’m starting to have my doubts regarding this project… Also, with PeerTube being so difficult to work on and modify, this is even more so alarming.
Peertube is backed by framasoft and i have no doubt at all over the sincerity of free software goals, and i have no doubt from @Chocobozz spirit either.
It is clearly possible to not be part of joinpeertube.org and create your own instance aggregator, and in fact to be on joinpeertube.org you have to add voluntarily your instance to.
And yes peertube is like any other project relying on a framework difficult to enter in if you are not used to develop on that framework.
As Chris were says in his video https://share.tube/videos/watch/a5965381-6218-4313-9457-d8b2292a9a2e Peertube is still very young, and it is very promising. Many choices are still open and shoudl be discussed.
As i already stated in french i think @chocobooz as creator and (really main) developer should not receive and respond directly to critism but after passing through a support team. It is not a good thing to treat hot topic when they are burning, would should wait a little that topic get colder.
I have other remarks too, but i think most are just related to the fact that dev community in any open source projet is scarce compared to user side.
We should not be afraid to expose problems, the soonest the better, and trying to find solution altogether. For me gourvenance is one topic to address, coldly and with openness.
Peertube is now not only belonging to its creator but to whole community of instance owners and users. This is a good sign, that it raises interest and questions.
We have a semi auto process to blacklist instances that change their videos metadatas so we can have relevant stats (https://instances.joinpeertube.org/instances/stats). My message wasn’t a threat: you do what you want on your instance.
But yes you’re right, we need to explain this somewhere. We’ll do an “about page” (or something like that) in the coming weeks.
no one should be able to control what content you post on it
We are talking about a federation statistics tool. Not the federation itself. So it makes sense to not count in the stats of the instances that are obviously gaming them.
Please remove your video or instances.joinpeertube.org will blacklist your instance
I get it, this phrase can be interpreted as the content of the video being the problem, but it was actually the metadata
@own3mall & @plhardy
It’s a bit worrying that this misunderstanding caused such suspicions on the project. Assumption of good faith will be even more important to when there will be real issues to discuss about.
