4 ms·

Everyone wants absolute free speech until their platform is taken over by conspiracy freaks, white supremacists, nazis, and anti vaxxers...

ArneBab 5y ago
And then you find out, whether your moderation works. Point in case: On Freenet it does. But I had to close down my youtube comments on my channel completely when they discovered my youtube-Account. Because it’s the clearnet where moderation sucks. Its actually scaling, fully decentralized moderation system is how Freenet keeps communication friendly with actual pseudonymity and privacy protection: https://www.draketo.de/english/freenet/friendly-communication-with-anonymity https://www.draketo.de/english/freenet/friendly-communicatio...
- bananamerica 5y ago
  I know some of the words you used.
- schleck8 5y ago
  The two top comments are of people complaining about csam content floating around freenet
  - ArneBab 5y ago
    As usual. And they wrongly claim that you find that by chance. Reality is: You don’t, except if you go searching for it. Just like in the clearnet.
intricatedetail 5y ago
Don't forget about activists and competition posting illegal content and then reporting it.
ellyagg 5y ago
No, I definitely want absolute free speech so folks can safely talk about taboo subjects. Not being able to have a forum to discuss taboo subjects is a creeping evil, IMO.
- bananamerica 5y ago
  What exactly is a taboo subject?
didjathinkmess 5y ago
Just because I don't agree with Nazis who want to take my guns away, doesn't mean I want to censor them. It's much more useful to engage with them and get into an open discussion. I stand up for their right to say whatever they like because it's a foundational human right. Think old ACLU or NPR before they went full authoritarian and now fully embrace censorship. If the question is WHO to censor, I've always thought the solution is not at the server side but on the client side. Any platform where sensitive topics are being discussed (conspiracies for example) is going to be spammed, trolled, forum slided, etc. The solution is to have filtering on the client side take away the spam. Similar to how you have ad lists which block adsense, googleanalytics, etc. Allow ALL speech, and then filter out just the ones you want. Much better than having a tyrannical government or corrupt media or powerful tech giants do it for me.
- bananamerica 5y ago
  That's nice theory. In practice, however, I'd like to see you try to engage them (as you put it), and have a nice, civil, productive exchange with white supremacists.

ArneBab 5y ago

And then you find out, whether your moderation works. Point in case: On Freenet it does. But I had to close down my youtube comments on my channel completely when they discovered my youtube-Account. Because it’s the clearnet where moderation sucks. Its actually scaling, fully decentralized moderation system is how Freenet keeps communication friendly with actual pseudonymity and privacy protection: https://www.draketo.de/english/freenet/friendly-communication-with-anonymity https://www.draketo.de/english/freenet/friendly-communicatio...

bananamerica 5y ago
I know some of the words you used.
schleck8 5y ago
The two top comments are of people complaining about csam content floating around freenet
- ArneBab 5y ago
  As usual. And they wrongly claim that you find that by chance. Reality is: You don’t, except if you go searching for it. Just like in the clearnet.

intricatedetail 5y ago

Don't forget about activists and competition posting illegal content and then reporting it.

ellyagg 5y ago

No, I definitely want absolute free speech so folks can safely talk about taboo subjects. Not being able to have a forum to discuss taboo subjects is a creeping evil, IMO.

bananamerica 5y ago
What exactly is a taboo subject?

didjathinkmess 5y ago

Just because I don't agree with Nazis who want to take my guns away, doesn't mean I want to censor them. It's much more useful to engage with them and get into an open discussion. I stand up for their right to say whatever they like because it's a foundational human right. Think old ACLU or NPR before they went full authoritarian and now fully embrace censorship. If the question is WHO to censor, I've always thought the solution is not at the server side but on the client side. Any platform where sensitive topics are being discussed (conspiracies for example) is going to be spammed, trolled, forum slided, etc. The solution is to have filtering on the client side take away the spam. Similar to how you have ad lists which block adsense, googleanalytics, etc. Allow ALL speech, and then filter out just the ones you want. Much better than having a tyrannical government or corrupt media or powerful tech giants do it for me.

bananamerica 5y ago
That's nice theory. In practice, however, I'd like to see you try to engage them (as you put it), and have a nice, civil, productive exchange with white supremacists.