4 ms·

Well, I will say that while you might think that Twitter has somehow taken a grim turn for the worst. Most people, outside of the most niche instances, will no

by SLWW 4y ago

Well, I will say that while you might think that Twitter has somehow taken a grim turn for the worst. Most people, outside of the most niche instances, will not find a "safe" harbor. I'm a long time user of the fediverse, I can't help but say that I love the freedom of having a bunch of independent nodes all communicating, all with our different standards and so forth. It's very freeing but it comes at a cost, most instances, however hard you try, will not censor half the things you would never see on Twitter. People like Twitter because of their draconian moderation efforts, I was banned from Twitter because I told someone that a death threat was not ok; apparently Twitter decided that I since i said "shut up" that i was somehow the aggressor. I'm tired of this idea that "Twitter's future is bleak" mentality, all because some rich guy bought it that would rather the platform be less strict when it comes to political thought. If it is the town square of the internet, it makes sense that people should be able to say what they want and be laughed at if they are being an idiot. Twitter was never a good platform in any sense of the word, it is probably now the best it's ever been, and it will be better once the active user count is under a thousand. People ruin things, don't be surprised when they ruin some mastadon instance you spend time on. As a side note, the people that run mastadon are a bit... off when it comes to ethics, so i would recommend pleroma which has had less, egregious, errors in the past.

teeray 4y ago
I'm not sure why blocklists aren't sufficient. Users with similar interests pool together to block content that they find disagreeable, so that others with similar views also aren't subjected to that content. It's basically an opt-in filter bubble. If your views change, so then can your filter bubble. All of the existing moderators at Twitter could do their exact same job--the difference is that users get to choose whether or not they subscribe to their filter or not (which even makes the filter more of an editorial product).
- SLWW 4y ago
  It's not that straight forward. It's a moving target, if an instance is blocked enough it will move to a different domain and start federating again. It's just something to keep in mind.
- Avamander 4y ago
  > I'm not sure why blocklists aren't sufficient. We have a great example to see why - email has existed for decades and neither spam or abuse is a solved problem. Both waste years of manhours each day.
  - teeray 4y ago
    But… it is solved. I rarely ever see true spam in my inbox—-filters pick it up and sequester it.
    - oneeyedpigeon 4y ago
      I think you must be in the minority. I just checked my gmail and emails #3 and #4 are both spam. And that's in Primary, not even Promotions or Social. A long time ago, it felt much better than this but it seems the spammers are slowly fighting back.
    - Avamander 4y ago
      It's an endless cat-and-mouse game. It might be true that people individually are not getting that much spam (on more modern platforms), but email is much more than gmail and in terms of volum a lot of spam still lands in people's inboxes (otherwise it wouldn't be done).
    - unsupp0rted 4y ago
      I get 3 “Confirmation.CostSco” type of emails breaking into my inbox a day now.
- TeMPOraL 4y ago
  It sounds nice in theory. In practice, what has already happened is that users get bullied by political extremists into blocking instances said extremists don't like, under threat of themselves being defederated. Most instances yield, because getting cut off from the main network defeats the point of running an instance in the first place. In the end, Mastodon gives users freedom to pool and block content they find disagreeable... as long as they disagree with the same content the activists disagree with. Otherwise, you get branded as undesirable by association, in an "if you're not with us, you're against us" fashion.
  - Cyberdog 4y ago
    I don't see why this is a tragedy. Yes, broadly speaking, instead of a single fediverse, there is a "free speech" fediverse and a "safe space" fediverse with little federation between them. But if the people on the safe space instances are happy with that, and the people on the free speech instances are fine with that, then what's the problem? If you really find it upsetting, you could set up your own instance which won't be on anyone's defed list yet, then just be careful not to post anything that will piss off either side.
    - TeMPOraL 4y ago
      > But if the people on the safe space instances are happy with that, and the people on the free speech instances are fine with that, then what's the problem? I don't think people on either side are fine with that. Most just keeps their heads down. It's mostly fine if you're not into engaging into politics overall, but it does get annoying when, every couple weeks or so, some event happens that turns half your feed into inane political drivel, and you can't even comment on it for the fear of getting kicked out of the instance. The main reason I'm talking about this is because I dislike false advertising, and the most touted feature of the Fediverse - the ability to individually choose who you peer with - isn't actually usable. It's a bit like gimbal lock[0] - technically you still have three axes of rotation, but in practice, the system reached a state in which it lost one degree of freedom. Yes, you can theoretically choose who you peer with - in practice, you'll either align your blocklist with the main branch or end up on everyone's blocklist. > If you really find it upsetting, you could set up your own instance which won't be on anyone's defed list yet, then just be careful not to post anything that will piss off either side. That's what I'm already doing as a user of a large instance; setting up my own instance has the same risk profile of getting kicked out, for a lot of extra work involved with maintaining an instance. And note that just being "careful not to post anything that will piss off either side" is not enough - you have to be careful to not follow (as a user) or federate with (as an instance) or keep users that follow (as an instance with many users) the instances on the "unwanted" list, or else you get banned/defederated by association. ---- [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimbal_lock https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimbal_lock
cr4nberry 4y ago
> As a side note, the people that run mastadon are a bit... off when it comes to ethics Could you give more info... sounds like there's some juicy details here
- SLWW 4y ago
  There is a lot i can't really talk about on this forum as I want to be sensitive to others and I can't exactly "spoiler" details that are gross/disturbing. If you so desire the information is out there, and there are blogs and so forth on the internet that link to the details. However i will summarize. Mastadon has taken a staunch position against racism and nazi ideas, which is fine. However they will go after those who are not so militant in this en devour, even if they do not support the aforementioned ideas, there's a lot of shaming that goes on if you don't all decide to block the same instances for example. However they have, many times over, allowed certain, borderline illegal (usually linking to illegal) content to be freely accessible on said platforms in the early days (for like a good 6+ months) of mastadon. After a lot of complaints they still did very little to nothing to stop that behavior. This is the source of my hate for mastadon and those instances. They have shown in the past that they are not consistent in what they block, they do not allow others to have agency and still federate with them, and they have turned a blind eye to the proliferation of child abuse. Gab has a hard block coded into mastadon, you can not federate with them unless you actively modify the code; however, other instances that are completely untenable are not blocked in the same manner. It was for this reason that the great "split" happened, about a year or two-ish ago. Where a lot of mastadon instances no longer federate with large portions of the fediverse. It's caused a weird bubble. I just will never forget the twisted concept of, "if you are racist, or like Hitler we can't have you" while on the other hand, leaving a large (believed intentional) gap for illicit materials that personally, it breaks my heart to see that kind of degeneracy. On our instances we do not block political ideologies, however when it comes to drawn or real child abuse, we have never allowed it, and will never allow it. It is one of the greatest evils of our time. EDIT: this is my opinion from what i saw back in the early days, they could have changed, i don't chance it, just know when reading that this was a long time ago in internet years and a lot of those people aren't as active as they used to be. I hope they have improved the community, but i will always hold this grudge.
msravi 4y ago
The last time a big move to mastodon was tried, this happened. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31195851 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31195851 I think what we need is just a twitter feed without any censorship (apart from those required by law), that will allow us to add our own customized filters. And maybe people can publish (and probably even sell) their custom filters. Somewhat like adblock lists that we have now. That would get rid of blanket censorship (at the server level if it's mastadon) as well as allow people to consume/engage with accounts they choose.
oneeyedpigeon 4y ago
> People like Twitter because of their draconian moderation efforts, I was banned from Twitter because I told someone that a death threat was not ok; apparently Twitter decided that I since i said "shut up" that i was somehow the aggressor. Such a strange comment because it's diametrically opposed to my experience of Twitter. People aren't complaining about 'draconian moderation efforts' as much as rampant abuse, trolling, and disinformation. A simple "shut up" tweet would never get banned — far, far worse seemingly goes unpunished. I suspect there's more context to that one than you're letting on.

by SLWW 4y ago

teeray 4y ago

I'm not sure why blocklists aren't sufficient. Users with similar interests pool together to block content that they find disagreeable, so that others with similar views also aren't subjected to that content. It's basically an opt-in filter bubble. If your views change, so then can your filter bubble. All of the existing moderators at Twitter could do their exact same job--the difference is that users get to choose whether or not they subscribe to their filter or not (which even makes the filter more of an editorial product).

SLWW 4y ago
It's not that straight forward. It's a moving target, if an instance is blocked enough it will move to a different domain and start federating again. It's just something to keep in mind.
Avamander 4y ago
> I'm not sure why blocklists aren't sufficient. We have a great example to see why - email has existed for decades and neither spam or abuse is a solved problem. Both waste years of manhours each day.
- teeray 4y ago
  But… it is solved. I rarely ever see true spam in my inbox—-filters pick it up and sequester it.
  - oneeyedpigeon 4y ago
    I think you must be in the minority. I just checked my gmail and emails #3 and #4 are both spam. And that's in Primary, not even Promotions or Social. A long time ago, it felt much better than this but it seems the spammers are slowly fighting back.
  - Avamander 4y ago
    It's an endless cat-and-mouse game. It might be true that people individually are not getting that much spam (on more modern platforms), but email is much more than gmail and in terms of volum a lot of spam still lands in people's inboxes (otherwise it wouldn't be done).
  - unsupp0rted 4y ago
    I get 3 “Confirmation.CostSco” type of emails breaking into my inbox a day now.
TeMPOraL 4y ago
It sounds nice in theory. In practice, what has already happened is that users get bullied by political extremists into blocking instances said extremists don't like, under threat of themselves being defederated. Most instances yield, because getting cut off from the main network defeats the point of running an instance in the first place. In the end, Mastodon gives users freedom to pool and block content they find disagreeable... as long as they disagree with the same content the activists disagree with. Otherwise, you get branded as undesirable by association, in an "if you're not with us, you're against us" fashion.
- Cyberdog 4y ago
  I don't see why this is a tragedy. Yes, broadly speaking, instead of a single fediverse, there is a "free speech" fediverse and a "safe space" fediverse with little federation between them. But if the people on the safe space instances are happy with that, and the people on the free speech instances are fine with that, then what's the problem? If you really find it upsetting, you could set up your own instance which won't be on anyone's defed list yet, then just be careful not to post anything that will piss off either side.
  - TeMPOraL 4y ago
    > But if the people on the safe space instances are happy with that, and the people on the free speech instances are fine with that, then what's the problem? I don't think people on either side are fine with that. Most just keeps their heads down. It's mostly fine if you're not into engaging into politics overall, but it does get annoying when, every couple weeks or so, some event happens that turns half your feed into inane political drivel, and you can't even comment on it for the fear of getting kicked out of the instance. The main reason I'm talking about this is because I dislike false advertising, and the most touted feature of the Fediverse - the ability to individually choose who you peer with - isn't actually usable. It's a bit like gimbal lock[0] - technically you still have three axes of rotation, but in practice, the system reached a state in which it lost one degree of freedom. Yes, you can theoretically choose who you peer with - in practice, you'll either align your blocklist with the main branch or end up on everyone's blocklist. > If you really find it upsetting, you could set up your own instance which won't be on anyone's defed list yet, then just be careful not to post anything that will piss off either side. That's what I'm already doing as a user of a large instance; setting up my own instance has the same risk profile of getting kicked out, for a lot of extra work involved with maintaining an instance. And note that just being "careful not to post anything that will piss off either side" is not enough - you have to be careful to not follow (as a user) or federate with (as an instance) or keep users that follow (as an instance with many users) the instances on the "unwanted" list, or else you get banned/defederated by association. ---- [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimbal_lock https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimbal_lock

cr4nberry 4y ago

> As a side note, the people that run mastadon are a bit... off when it comes to ethics Could you give more info... sounds like there's some juicy details here

SLWW 4y ago
There is a lot i can't really talk about on this forum as I want to be sensitive to others and I can't exactly "spoiler" details that are gross/disturbing. If you so desire the information is out there, and there are blogs and so forth on the internet that link to the details. However i will summarize. Mastadon has taken a staunch position against racism and nazi ideas, which is fine. However they will go after those who are not so militant in this en devour, even if they do not support the aforementioned ideas, there's a lot of shaming that goes on if you don't all decide to block the same instances for example. However they have, many times over, allowed certain, borderline illegal (usually linking to illegal) content to be freely accessible on said platforms in the early days (for like a good 6+ months) of mastadon. After a lot of complaints they still did very little to nothing to stop that behavior. This is the source of my hate for mastadon and those instances. They have shown in the past that they are not consistent in what they block, they do not allow others to have agency and still federate with them, and they have turned a blind eye to the proliferation of child abuse. Gab has a hard block coded into mastadon, you can not federate with them unless you actively modify the code; however, other instances that are completely untenable are not blocked in the same manner. It was for this reason that the great "split" happened, about a year or two-ish ago. Where a lot of mastadon instances no longer federate with large portions of the fediverse. It's caused a weird bubble. I just will never forget the twisted concept of, "if you are racist, or like Hitler we can't have you" while on the other hand, leaving a large (believed intentional) gap for illicit materials that personally, it breaks my heart to see that kind of degeneracy. On our instances we do not block political ideologies, however when it comes to drawn or real child abuse, we have never allowed it, and will never allow it. It is one of the greatest evils of our time. EDIT: this is my opinion from what i saw back in the early days, they could have changed, i don't chance it, just know when reading that this was a long time ago in internet years and a lot of those people aren't as active as they used to be. I hope they have improved the community, but i will always hold this grudge.

msravi 4y ago

The last time a big move to mastodon was tried, this happened. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31195851 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31195851 I think what we need is just a twitter feed without any censorship (apart from those required by law), that will allow us to add our own customized filters. And maybe people can publish (and probably even sell) their custom filters. Somewhat like adblock lists that we have now. That would get rid of blanket censorship (at the server level if it's mastadon) as well as allow people to consume/engage with accounts they choose.

oneeyedpigeon 4y ago

> People like Twitter because of their draconian moderation efforts, I was banned from Twitter because I told someone that a death threat was not ok; apparently Twitter decided that I since i said "shut up" that i was somehow the aggressor. Such a strange comment because it's diametrically opposed to my experience of Twitter. People aren't complaining about 'draconian moderation efforts' as much as rampant abuse, trolling, and disinformation. A simple "shut up" tweet would never get banned — far, far worse seemingly goes unpunished. I suspect there's more context to that one than you're letting on.