See the tool here: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/95652

And some discussion of the issue here: https://lemm.ee/post/177673

This tool produces a list of instances which have a very high number of users compared to the number of comments and posts. These instances are assumed to have high number of bot accounts on them.

Some other instances have started blocking them, should sh.itjust.works follow suit?

Of course, this need not be permanent, and will be reversed when those instances resolve the issue.

For reference, this is a list of instances suspected of being botted by the tool’s default settings: https://overseer.dbzer0.com/api/v1/instances?activity_suspicion=20&domains=true

Ayes and nays please!

    • imaqtpie@sh.itjust.worksM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Wow, this platform is growing up before our eyes.

      Thanks https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/u/db0.

      It’s my understanding that db0 was a mod over at r/piracy and was able to get a big chunk of subscribers to come over to Lemmy. Good on him for being one of the only reddit mods to take a stand.

  • tcely@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Nay.

    I don’t like bots much, but this is still an assumption. I don’t want to get into preventative de-federation, if it is at all possible to avoid it.

    The Meta/Facebook instance(s) should be though.

    • God@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      the script in theory removes instances that have handled their spam issue which should also in theory remove from the defederation recommendations, and if there’s regular updates to the federation list, we would refederate without them having to communicate

      • sneakyninjapants@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        removes instances that have handled their spam issue

        Ah now that you mention it, that makes perfect sense. Their user count to activity count ratio will improve once they remove the bot accounts.

  • pancakes@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Aye.

    It’s pretty obvious which ones are botted instances. 30,000 users and 20 total posts on the instance? That’s a bot.

    • kd637_mi@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not necessarily, my account is on SDF because of their solid uptime, lack of defederated instances, relatively low user count compared to the more bloated instances, and a general appreciation for SDF’s ethos. I generally don’t post in many local communities.

      However there will be some where it’s obvious for sure. I just worry about people on lesser know instances that might not allow free creation of communities, but have policies they agree with.

  • nyahlathotep@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Aye.

    I haven’t looked into how it works, but I feel like we should be open to reviewing it’s findings if an instance wants to dispute our defederation. Maybe it’s got a surefire method of determining bot-heavy lemmys (bottys?), but I’m worried about false positives.

  • MoreCoffee@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Aye. It’s clear those are bot accounts, I see no reason not to. Servers can be unblocked in the future if things change.

  • haxe11@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Aye.

    I agree with others in the thread that we should be open to communicating with admins for false positives though.