this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2026
549 points (97.7% liked)

/0

2201 readers
35 users here now

Meta community. Discuss about this lemmy instance or lemmy in general.

Service Uptime view

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I discovered this after upgrading our instance yesterday, which also upgraded all frontends to their latest versions as well. After I did, our Tesseract frontend stopped working and I noticed immediately as it's been my primary for a while. Initially I thought it was an API version mismatch, but no, it was much worse.

Someone pointed out that the developer of the frontend added an explicit hidden and unmodifiably blacklist which includes any and all instances to the left of Kissinger. There's a commit which also explains their specious reasoning about our instance specifically, as it seems we've been on their shit list for a bit longer than that.

This instance and its admin staff encourages identity politics, groupthink, mob mentality, and extremist solutions to societal problems. Users who advocate violence are not moderated so long as the admins agree with the target. Caution and critical thinking are advised when interacting with this instance or its users.

When you use tesseract to connect to one blacklisted such instance , you just get a message informing you that Tesseract is "incompatible with that instance" which leads one to think of a technical issue, like an API mismatch, rather than the dev being an opinionated coward.

Isn't it funny how all the software developed by turbolibs, like Piefed and Tesseract, end up with hidden control mechanisms from developers who think they know better than everyone else? That they don't just think they deserve to tell you what you should think, but they should manipulate you to think it? Isn't it funny how libs go on about how bad it is to support lemmy due to the ideology of the devs behind it, and yet lemmy has 0 opinions as a software? It does make one think...

Anyway, I forked - it as one does - and disabled the blacklist, but since this is a massively ideologically compromised software, I'll doubt I'll keep this frontend up after Lemmy 1.0. I think we'll bring up mlmym again now that someone's maintaining it again.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 day ago (4 children)
[–] RedWizard@hexbear.net 2 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

It looks like they transferred ownership of the repo?

[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 21 hours ago
[–] goferking0 1 points 22 hours ago

I love the still have the commited developer part in Readme after their development halted message

[–] mr_satan@lemmy.zip 0 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

More likely they privated their repo. Your fork is way ahead with this devs commits. I'd guess the dev made a fork of the paulo-roger repo when they stopped the development.

[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Mine is ahead because that repo was at my level when I forked

[–] mr_satan@lemmy.zip 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Well yeah. The guy made a bunch of commits, you forked, they privated the repo. The repo you forked "no longer exists" so parent fork is reported. Nobody renamed their account, nobody transferred the repo.

[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

I'm pretty sure his wasn't a fork. He hard forked from photon, so there's nobody he forked from calling it tesseract. This doesn't make sense

[–] floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

So the last commit on the apparent "original" paulo-roger/tesseract repo states abandonment of the project in 2023. However this commit, like every other in this repo, is authored by asimons04.

$ git log | grep asimons | wc -l 
651
$ git log | grep roger | wc -l
0

That seems pretty weird to me. I guess if they were added as a contributor at some point they could've force-pushed a rewritten history? Still doesn't make a lot of sense.

Edit: Maybe it's just paulo-roger who checked out asimons04's repo after they abandoned it and uploaded it to his profile as a fresh repo instead of forking, and somehow GitHub mistook it for the parent repo after as04 made their repo private/whatever happened?

[–] mr_satan@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

My theory was something like:

  • Repo A (paulo-roger) abandoned at 2023
  • Repo B (asimons04) forked and worked from there
  • Repo C (OP)

Now what happens if repo B is removed (privated)? We still have all the commit history form repo B, but no upstream to link to that history. We also have all the commit history form repo A, however the upstream is still public so it gets linked properly.

The fork chain is still the same A -> b -> C we just no longer see repo B on github. It doesn't mean that anything got moved, deleted or overwritten, just hidden.

[–] floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 48 minutes ago (2 children)

The fork chain makes sense, but why is asimons04 the author of every commit in repo A?

[–] mr_satan@lemmy.zip 1 points 9 minutes ago

The OG repo seems to be back. Now I'm stumped on my theory.

[–] mr_satan@lemmy.zip 1 points 16 minutes ago* (last edited 16 minutes ago)

That I cannot answer, maybe he took over as the main dev and moved the work to his repo. Maybe there's some other explanation.

[–] Javi@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago

Fair enough. I noticed that one from the fork you made. I just assumed that's where Patrick forked it from originally.