4 ms·

>Now imagine that a user on one platform can interact with any of the other platforms through a single interface. I love the spirit here, but I think everyone

>Now imagine that a user on one platform can interact with any of the other platforms through a single interface. I love the spirit here, but I think everyone here is aware that outside of mainstream networks like Twitter you have other networks which are just full of rampant hate speech. If you tell Facebook they have to support allowing hateful users to contact their own, Facebook no longer has any ability to moderate anything. I would love social media which wasn't controlled by a single Mega company, but I'm just not sure how this could exist. I have heard of projects, say a local group of college students set up zoom socializing, which does provide a much needed alternative. But I just don't think this can scale, once you have no obligation to the group to be a decent human being, it becomes extremely easy to be nasty and mean. I'm lucky enough to be a part of one zoom ( for now, I met the owner in real life) community. He has to personally let everyone else in to the room, and he's already had to ban a few people for over the top racism. Before you know it everyone is meaner on social media than they'd ever be in the real world . It's at the point where I don't want to feel my mind with that, therefore I just don't partake. If this ever was something Facebook had to do, within hours you'd be flooded with bots dming you nonsense. As is Facebook has major issues with Spam and abuse, what's the stop someone from creating a service which just sends bots in to hurl racist insults

grishka 6y ago
Federated social media works around this just fine. Any server can ban any other server breaking its rules. Yes, a federated system will inevitably be abused by malicious actors because of its inherent openness. But if it's closed the way it is now, then it is abused by the company that owns each platform. If I had to choose, I'd absolutely pick spam over ads, tracking, and dark patterns. Spam is at least easier to deal with and universally hated by everyone while most people don't even realize they're being tracked at all times.
- offtop5 6y ago
  You can also just not use social media. No one forces you to use Facebook. I respect the right of Facebook to not want to be over ran with hate speech. It's a nominal task to spin up a fresh server everytime you get banned. The only effective way to stop said spam would be for FB to have a limited white list of vetted partners. So your back where you started .
  - grishka 6y ago
    > You can also just not use social media. And use what instead? > No one forces you to use Facebook. What are your choices, exactly, if all your friends use it? So you're either on Facebook, or you're missing out and inconveniencing your friends. There's currently no third option.
    - offtop5 6y ago
      I still keep FB around for messaging. I wouldn't force FB open. As is hate speech is a massive issue. Your free to use a federated service if you want though
  - Dahoon 6y ago
    >You can also just not use social media. Have you tried that? Lots of stuff that shouldn't be on Facebook is, like state/government/etc. using it for lots of different purposes. It's like saying "you could also just not have a phone/computer/internet/heat".

grishka 6y ago

Federated social media works around this just fine. Any server can ban any other server breaking its rules. Yes, a federated system will inevitably be abused by malicious actors because of its inherent openness. But if it's closed the way it is now, then it is abused by the company that owns each platform. If I had to choose, I'd absolutely pick spam over ads, tracking, and dark patterns. Spam is at least easier to deal with and universally hated by everyone while most people don't even realize they're being tracked at all times.

offtop5 6y ago
You can also just not use social media. No one forces you to use Facebook. I respect the right of Facebook to not want to be over ran with hate speech. It's a nominal task to spin up a fresh server everytime you get banned. The only effective way to stop said spam would be for FB to have a limited white list of vetted partners. So your back where you started .
- grishka 6y ago
  > You can also just not use social media. And use what instead? > No one forces you to use Facebook. What are your choices, exactly, if all your friends use it? So you're either on Facebook, or you're missing out and inconveniencing your friends. There's currently no third option.
  - offtop5 6y ago
    I still keep FB around for messaging. I wouldn't force FB open. As is hate speech is a massive issue. Your free to use a federated service if you want though
- Dahoon 6y ago
  >You can also just not use social media. Have you tried that? Lots of stuff that shouldn't be on Facebook is, like state/government/etc. using it for lots of different purposes. It's like saying "you could also just not have a phone/computer/internet/heat".