They are in fact illegal in the US, if they are 'obscene', but what is deemed 'obscene' I believe is up to state law. A supreme court decision ruled that the ma

They are in fact illegal in the US, if they are 'obscene', but what is deemed 'obscene' I believe is up to state law. A supreme court decision ruled that the material would be OK if it was not 'obscene'. I'm sorry I can't source this at the moment, I'd be interested if there's any more information about it. I believe it was something along the lines of the 'PROTECT' act, though again, I'm not sure. >The question is, if you setup a Mastodon instance, do you want to be responsible for caching questionable content I don't see why it has to be cached at all; if you don't want to run the risk, why not disable caching? I had the idea that clients could choose particular instances to 'stream' from, and that the stream need not be coordinated by a server. In a similar way to IRC where you can join a channel, it would be similar, but with multiple servers. The server doesn't need to store the messages it doesn't want to. Though, I'm sorry if I'm missing something terribly obvious here.