3 ms·
These insecurities are not at the same level, and do not compare. Don't see it as the difference between zero security and infinite security, it's a spectrum or
by fleddr 4y ago
These insecurities are not at the same level, and do not compare. Don't see it as the difference between zero security and infinite security, it's a spectrum or scale instead.
On FB, I can go back 10 years and my content is still there. All of it. With the exception of a suspension, FB doesn't delete user content. Ever. The same applies to Twitter. Their track record of content persistence is excellent.
On Mastodon, media gets purged pretty much by policy. So you can be sure that you lose it all, thus rendering old toots useless. Add to this that every instance can disappear at any time, so besides your content, your account is also not safe.
What Musk could and could not decide is speculation. Track record looks back, not forward.
- xg15 4y ago> Their track record of content persistence is excellent. Musk has just replaced the entire leadership of Twitter. What kind of track record Twitter used to have is entirely irrelevant for how it will behave in the future. It's the same fallacy like a reputable company selling a well-known brand. People will stick to the brand (for a while) because they associate it with the performance of the original company behind it. However, that's a deception. The brand itself will tell you nothing about how the new company will behave.
- fleddr 4y agoI really don't want to go down the Twitter rabbit hole. An exception to the rule (which is still speculative) does not disprove the rule. The rule being that on large centralized platforms, one has drastically better content security.