Of course! Moderation is censorship. There is certain content I don't want to see, and I don't want to have to filter it myself so I join a community of seemingly likeminded people who censor content based on rules I generally agree with. They ban users who break the rules, keep spambots out, block malicious instances and so on, and if they are doing their job right then it builds trust and attracts more people.
what about it makes you think that to be the case?
Because you want to strip all that out and abstract it away. Who do you think would do the moderating and spam blocking? Who aggregates posts from all over the world and presents a sorted list to a user on their smartphone? It would be the wild west with users having to do everything themselves. I know it's tempting to think about building a Fediverse without instances, but afaik you need these social structures for the system to work.
Crypto for example only works because you can define the rules mathematically beforehand, and then hand out money for computers to check them. That's just not possible with a public forum, at least not yet imo.
Cryptocurrencies and social platforms are completely different beasts. In crypto I want no moderation/censorship, I want anonymity, and there is a payout system so nodes can compete for something. This is all different when building a social network, so you can't just use the same architecture. Building social structures and trust is desirable in a public forum, not something you want to get rid of.
This is not the solution! Being able to pick a server to trust your data and content moderation with is a feature, not a bug.
What we do have to do is make this feature more resilient and easier to use. Like adding the ability to easily transfer accounts and communities between instances, or even change the domain name of an entire instance.
Because DNS is the user-facing part of the whole system. There is plenty of trouble with everything else, but you usually don't see that as a user. Also it's a hierarchical system with big providers/governments giving and taking names as they see fit, so there is always the possibility to get screwed.
Looks good so far, but two major features I want from a note taking app are still missing: Handwriting and table calculations. If they can add good support for those then I'll definitely switch!
RHEL is not Fedora. It's still lead by a community council, even if you don't agree with some of their decisions.
In case of your first link it wasn't even about making a decision. The project has always had the clear stance to not include patented works, so there were no two ways about it.
Afaik it is all connected to the domain name, so they could definitely start to impersonate any .ml instance. Other instances could detect that the signing key for federation messages changed, but that's about it. Their admins would probably have to block/defederate them manually.
Not really. Most centralized services are accessible via multiple domains, e.g. for different countries. This would just disable one of them, but users could still use another to log into their accounts. For the Fediverse it "disables" an entire instance, cuts it off from federation and locks out users.
Lets not put a positive spin on a situation that exposes a weakness of the current system. The federation protocol needs to be able to handle these things gracefully, like propagating domain changes and migrating accounts between instances!
A domain takedown was never able to shut a server down, not even with centralized servers. Most big services are accessible via multiple domains of different countries, and this would just disable one of them. But for the Fediverse that means that they also "disabled" an entire instance with all its users.
This actually shows us that relying on domains can be a problem for the Fediverse! Imo we need to upgrade the federation protocol to be able to handle these things, like propagating a domain change or migrating accounts to other instances.
This is suspicion on the level of "you can't be sure reality didn't just pop into existence 10 seconds ago". You can never be 100% sure of what others are doing on their hardware, or of anything really, especially if other people are involved. Your chat partners could leak all your chats and metadata for all you know!
What we do know is that Signal is operated by a non-profit foundation, their client and protocol are open source and considered the gold standard for privacy by pretty much every expert on the subject, they had multiple independent audits and a very good track record, they were subpoenaed and couldn't comply because they didn't have the requested data. That's about as good as you can get.
You can install Libretube and make it the default handler for youtube and many public piped domains. This way when you click on a yt link it opens in Libretube and plays the video via your piped instance.
On my phone it's in the system settings for the app under "Open by default".
I've tried a few and landed on the "VaKo 12 Ports Dockingstation". Most reliable hub I used so far. I bought it 3 years ago and it's still working flawlessly.
Using p2p for messaging is really nice for decentralization, but it has the major downside that both communication partners have to be online at the same time to find each other and transmit a message. So you might have to wait for it until both look at their phones at the exact same time. On top there are privacy issues, like being able to see the devices and public IP addresses of other users.
Imo its just not practical and robust enough to be used by millions of non-techy people.
Depends on the level of technology we are using. If we're zapping around from one habitable planet or interesting space phenomenon to another star trek style then absolutely yes! But a hard no with our current level of technology. I like to spend my time in an environment that's actually somewhat friendly to life.
shrugal @ shrugal @lemmy.world Posts 0Comments 68Joined 2 yr. ago
Of course! Moderation is censorship. There is certain content I don't want to see, and I don't want to have to filter it myself so I join a community of seemingly likeminded people who censor content based on rules I generally agree with. They ban users who break the rules, keep spambots out, block malicious instances and so on, and if they are doing their job right then it builds trust and attracts more people.
Because you want to strip all that out and abstract it away. Who do you think would do the moderating and spam blocking? Who aggregates posts from all over the world and presents a sorted list to a user on their smartphone? It would be the wild west with users having to do everything themselves. I know it's tempting to think about building a Fediverse without instances, but afaik you need these social structures for the system to work.
Crypto for example only works because you can define the rules mathematically beforehand, and then hand out money for computers to check them. That's just not possible with a public forum, at least not yet imo.