4 ms·

> because of that they are tricking a lot of people into using them This may come as a surprise. But your average cool, interesting person doesn't care whethe

> because of that they are tricking a lot of people into using them This may come as a surprise. But your average cool, interesting person doesn't care whether Bluesky has a decentralised protocol or the intricacies of its identity model. The reason most people are using it is because it's the closest thing to a Musk-less Twitter.

mjfl 4y ago
Which is funny because this demographic values blocking, banning, and censorship very highly while these are exactly the sort of things Nostr and Bluesky are designed to prevent.
- _x2o9 4y ago
  Irony is lost on these authoritarians who are anti-free speech.
  - mjfl 4y ago
    Totally, see the other reply thread - not even the engineers building it seem to understand the irony.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- capableweb 4y ago
  Bluesky at least is not design to prevent "blocking, banning, and censorship" at all, not sure where you get that idea from. Blocking/moderation/"censorship" will happen from people's own actions, or subscribing to someone else's actions. If you want, you can just not participate in blocking/moderation at all and have a raw view, but most people will probably opt-in to a moderated view, as the internet is usually (not always) viewed with a moderated perspective.
  - mjfl 4y ago
    Huh? But blocking someone on a distributed protocol seems impossible? to block someone, or censor them, you would have to get every node in the network to cooperate. Sure you can “mute” someone and not see their posts personally pretty easily. But if you want to make it so that others can’t see someone’s posts, like Alex Jones or Trump, and generally block the public from seeing them, this action seems much harder.
    - capableweb 4y ago
      Yeah, if what you want is to prevent others from seeing other-others content, you're gonna have a hard time implementing that in a decentralized/distributed protocol, just as you say. You basically have to chose between that or allowing the platform to censor anyone, which these "new breeds" of social networks seems to make the choice of doing "personal blocking" rather than "network wide" blocking. What I think most people want though, is not "blocking" in terms of "no one will be able to see this person" but "blocking" in terms of "I don't want them to be able to interact with me, nor do I want to see their content".
      - mjfl 4y ago
        [flagged]
        capableweb 4y ago
        You're gonna have to start citing something from folks joining bluesky saying that that's what they want, because inside the platform, no one is echoing that sentiment, nor does either bluesky or AT protocol websites suggest an approach where people are being blocked in that manner. bluesky/AT protocol is pretty clear how they see moderation to work. > Our approach to moderation is three-fold: automated filtering, manual admin actions, and community labeling > Labels can be automatically or manually generated, and can be applied by any service or person in the network > For example, an organization like the ACLU could create a “hate-speech” label, and services or users in the network could subscribe to their labels to flag, filter, mute, or ban content. The Bluesky reference app we’re building has custom controls that lets users hide, warn, or show content, and will add more controls over time. Through this approach, we aim to prioritize user safety while giving people more control and transparency over how moderation is done https://blueskyweb.xyz/faq https://blueskyweb.xyz/faq Plus https://blueskyweb.xyz/blog/4-13-2023-moderation https://blueskyweb.xyz/blog/4-13-2023-moderation If people, after reading that (or ignoring that) still end up bluesky, we can kind of assume that they agree (explicitly or implicitly) with the approach.
Gigachad 4y ago
I pressed a button on Twitter to not show me anything from musk. Now it’s a muskless twitter. Meanwhile I’ve heard that alternatives like mastodon have half the user base taking about musk. That’s much harder to block.
- ciwolsey 4y ago
  And of course nobody on Twitter is talking about Musk.
  - manojlds 4y ago
    Or posting screenshots of stuff he does etc etc.
  - thinkingemote 4y ago
    Indeed, a few more button presses are needed to type "musk" and "Elon" in the mute words setting. Most users don't use or know about this function. It's an optional thing to disengage from the hype but but not really obvious for normal users.
- m-p-3 4y ago
  you can apply filter on Mastodon, not only on tags but on words themselves. simply filter "Musk" to have a Musk-free Mastodon experience.
fiatjaf 4y ago
This is wrong: 1. even average people do appreciate the fact that the thing is an open protocol, even if they do not comment about it or understand it or seem to care. 2. average people do follow some leaders when deciding where to move, and the leaders are people that mostly care about these things -- these are the ones being tricked.

mjfl 4y ago

Which is funny because this demographic values blocking, banning, and censorship very highly while these are exactly the sort of things Nostr and Bluesky are designed to prevent.

_x2o9 4y ago
Irony is lost on these authoritarians who are anti-free speech.
- mjfl 4y ago
  Totally, see the other reply thread - not even the engineers building it seem to understand the irony.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
capableweb 4y ago
Bluesky at least is not design to prevent "blocking, banning, and censorship" at all, not sure where you get that idea from. Blocking/moderation/"censorship" will happen from people's own actions, or subscribing to someone else's actions. If you want, you can just not participate in blocking/moderation at all and have a raw view, but most people will probably opt-in to a moderated view, as the internet is usually (not always) viewed with a moderated perspective.
- mjfl 4y ago
  Huh? But blocking someone on a distributed protocol seems impossible? to block someone, or censor them, you would have to get every node in the network to cooperate. Sure you can “mute” someone and not see their posts personally pretty easily. But if you want to make it so that others can’t see someone’s posts, like Alex Jones or Trump, and generally block the public from seeing them, this action seems much harder.
  - capableweb 4y ago
    Yeah, if what you want is to prevent others from seeing other-others content, you're gonna have a hard time implementing that in a decentralized/distributed protocol, just as you say. You basically have to chose between that or allowing the platform to censor anyone, which these "new breeds" of social networks seems to make the choice of doing "personal blocking" rather than "network wide" blocking. What I think most people want though, is not "blocking" in terms of "no one will be able to see this person" but "blocking" in terms of "I don't want them to be able to interact with me, nor do I want to see their content".
    - mjfl 4y ago
      [flagged]
      - capableweb 4y ago
        You're gonna have to start citing something from folks joining bluesky saying that that's what they want, because inside the platform, no one is echoing that sentiment, nor does either bluesky or AT protocol websites suggest an approach where people are being blocked in that manner. bluesky/AT protocol is pretty clear how they see moderation to work. > Our approach to moderation is three-fold: automated filtering, manual admin actions, and community labeling > Labels can be automatically or manually generated, and can be applied by any service or person in the network > For example, an organization like the ACLU could create a “hate-speech” label, and services or users in the network could subscribe to their labels to flag, filter, mute, or ban content. The Bluesky reference app we’re building has custom controls that lets users hide, warn, or show content, and will add more controls over time. Through this approach, we aim to prioritize user safety while giving people more control and transparency over how moderation is done https://blueskyweb.xyz/faq https://blueskyweb.xyz/faq Plus https://blueskyweb.xyz/blog/4-13-2023-moderation https://blueskyweb.xyz/blog/4-13-2023-moderation If people, after reading that (or ignoring that) still end up bluesky, we can kind of assume that they agree (explicitly or implicitly) with the approach.

Gigachad 4y ago

I pressed a button on Twitter to not show me anything from musk. Now it’s a muskless twitter. Meanwhile I’ve heard that alternatives like mastodon have half the user base taking about musk. That’s much harder to block.

ciwolsey 4y ago
And of course nobody on Twitter is talking about Musk.
- manojlds 4y ago
  Or posting screenshots of stuff he does etc etc.
- thinkingemote 4y ago
  Indeed, a few more button presses are needed to type "musk" and "Elon" in the mute words setting. Most users don't use or know about this function. It's an optional thing to disengage from the hype but but not really obvious for normal users.
m-p-3 4y ago
you can apply filter on Mastodon, not only on tags but on words themselves. simply filter "Musk" to have a Musk-free Mastodon experience.

fiatjaf 4y ago

This is wrong: 1. even average people do appreciate the fact that the thing is an open protocol, even if they do not comment about it or understand it or seem to care. 2. average people do follow some leaders when deciding where to move, and the leaders are people that mostly care about these things -- these are the ones being tricked.