3 ms·

> and may carry individual consequences. Ah! Love the chilling effects you give off, dear shadowgovt! In seriousness, more instances of opaque censorship/canc

> and may carry individual consequences. Ah! Love the chilling effects you give off, dear shadowgovt! In seriousness, more instances of opaque censorship/cancellation will lead to more attrition of centralized platforms already collapsing under their own weight.

shadowgovt 4y ago
No doubt. But "the rats scurry into the dark" has never been sufficient justification to stop shining light. As a recent concrete (though anecdotal) example, there is rumor going around that folks on Mastodon are finding it much harder to do Twitter-style brigading and harassment, because the threat of node-level defederation provides incentive to keep clean houses. Admins who don't want to be defederated police their borders, and people who don't want to play by common rules of decency find themselves on a network-island quickly, as they run out of playmates. It's old social custom encoded into protocol.
- danuker 4y ago
  I greatly prefer this distributed enforcement. I contrast this to Musk's banning of journalists.
- numpad0 4y ago
  Hasn't that developed into one Fediverse per continent? Many major instances seems to defederate with alt-right instances and porn-infested instances, except they seem to correspond to EU, NA and JP. With the 2nd and 3rd largest along half of top 10 being such "global pariah" instances, it isn't convincing to me that the Fediverse has a working fine grain federation control but seems like there are just handful disjoint Fediverses.
  - shadowgovt 4y ago
    And indeed, that might be working as intended. The Facebook / Twitter / TikTok "everyone under one tent" experiments may not reflect the best solution for what a social network should look like.
    - numpad0 4y ago
      Maybe, but it looks weird to be always blaming that the other twos are organizing civil unrest, than to be clear that the networks are split.
Der_Einzige 4y ago
Relevant meme re "individual consequences" for reading/looking at the wrong things: https://postimg.cc/62TPMBfN https://postimg.cc/62TPMBfN
- shadowgovt 4y ago
  Oh, I was thinking something far more mundane, like "People in your life stop choosing to associate with you once they learn how you spend your free time" or "Your employer considers you a liability for corporate image / discipline / legal entanglement (because if it's actually illegal content and you used their network, they can be liable if they look the other way)."

shadowgovt 4y ago

No doubt. But "the rats scurry into the dark" has never been sufficient justification to stop shining light. As a recent concrete (though anecdotal) example, there is rumor going around that folks on Mastodon are finding it much harder to do Twitter-style brigading and harassment, because the threat of node-level defederation provides incentive to keep clean houses. Admins who don't want to be defederated police their borders, and people who don't want to play by common rules of decency find themselves on a network-island quickly, as they run out of playmates. It's old social custom encoded into protocol.

danuker 4y ago
I greatly prefer this distributed enforcement. I contrast this to Musk's banning of journalists.
numpad0 4y ago
Hasn't that developed into one Fediverse per continent? Many major instances seems to defederate with alt-right instances and porn-infested instances, except they seem to correspond to EU, NA and JP. With the 2nd and 3rd largest along half of top 10 being such "global pariah" instances, it isn't convincing to me that the Fediverse has a working fine grain federation control but seems like there are just handful disjoint Fediverses.
- shadowgovt 4y ago
  And indeed, that might be working as intended. The Facebook / Twitter / TikTok "everyone under one tent" experiments may not reflect the best solution for what a social network should look like.
  - numpad0 4y ago
    Maybe, but it looks weird to be always blaming that the other twos are organizing civil unrest, than to be clear that the networks are split.

Der_Einzige 4y ago

Relevant meme re "individual consequences" for reading/looking at the wrong things: https://postimg.cc/62TPMBfN https://postimg.cc/62TPMBfN

shadowgovt 4y ago
Oh, I was thinking something far more mundane, like "People in your life stop choosing to associate with you once they learn how you spend your free time" or "Your employer considers you a liability for corporate image / discipline / legal entanglement (because if it's actually illegal content and you used their network, they can be liable if they look the other way)."