How bad would it be having an option to use emojis from specific servers? Something like :email@example.com: ?
@astro > sounds like emoji-abusing instances will need to be banned by any instance hosts on a smaller budget then
Why? Just don't use them - if the interface also showed up every node's emojis, it could do so in many ways that don't feel bloated, including grouping emojis with the same name, allowing to order tabs, and so on.
> (not that the entire emoji system isn't already a bloaty abuse of unicode)
It actually has nothing to do with Unicode, lol 🤔
@astro > Emojis are a feature of the unicode system.
Not the per-node emojis implemented at Mastodon, as they are based on bitmaps and tags instead of Unicode characters.
> And nobody needs every single nyancat from every single instance out their cluttering the disk on a $15 VPS just because someone boosted a toot.
We already do that.
Fair enough, to the former, and classic me: first time I articulate a complaint, I'm so excited about it I forget to confirm target, which is a *real* bad look.
To the latter, exactly, so I see that as bad getting worse. Also classic me: I see data bloat as a constant rising economic barrier to usability and widespread adoption.
@astro > To the latter, exactly, so I see that as bad getting worse.
This would actually remove data usage since nodes wouldn't have to create duplicate versions of emojis anymore. And emojis usually weight no more than 50 kb, having to handle thousands of toots and avatars is already a way bigger problem.
@astro Could work that way but doesn't have to (you could still cache them to make sure they don't disappear when its node gets down), but nowadays, a Mastodon node makes an emoji available to its users by duplicating it. There are emojis which are basically being currently stored dozens of times on every node. Doing what I propose, regardless of whenever using local cache or federated data, would still save storage.