3 ms·
>No one is advocating for looking at CSAM (well, except you). In fact there wasn’t even the suggestion of that. You’re being awfully charitable with such a con
by Red_Leaves_Flyy 3y ago
>No one is advocating for looking at CSAM (well, except you). In fact there wasn’t even the suggestion of that.
You’re being awfully charitable with such a contrived interpretation of the comment above mine. Fact is they didn’t say what bad stuff they think should be allowed in prominent online spaces frequented by children and vulnerable populations, legal or otherwise. Having read enough about the salacious corners of the clear net, it’s rather safe to assume CSAM is among the bad stuff this person was vaguely referencing. It would be helpful if they provided an enumerated list of the crap they enjoy seeing but that would also require them to expose themselves. Do you see the contradiction and need to read between the lines here?Every platform, even moderated one’s, faces this problem: Twitter, Facebook, instagram, Reddit, all of them. I’m not encouraging people to seek this stuff out, and your accusation that I am stands in stark contrast to the charity you gave the person above. Concerning. Regardless, if that’s their thing I hope they walk right into a honeypot.
>You are arguing that harboring (legal) disturbing content is tantamount to CSAM and should be censored because it “will not scale”, meaning you are focusing on a for-profit lens. Despite the fact that the conversation topic, the Fediverse, is not for-profit.
Bad faith argument and patent misinterpretation. Reddit, the front page of the internet, is mentioned in the context above and largely what I’m arguing in regards to. To be explicit, Reddit is not a federated platform and is for profit, and it’s reasonable to speculate on the intentions of the platforms leadership, especially when they state explicitly that they want more money. I’m not interested in arguing about what grimy stuff nobodies get up to on the fedoverse. It’s probably a lot like 4chan or the sites that spring up when abusive groups get hit by a ban wave on larger platforms: gab, truth social. The fefiverse will likely remain fringe for the foreseeable future for this very reason and isn’t an interesting discussion due to the limited audience. grimy people drive valuable/helpful users away necessitating the removal of said bad actors. Also, I’m not interested in the profitability of platforms. I’m interested in the health of the communities and grimy content pushes normal people away reducing the health of the community. I don’t care that the person above wants to look at grimy stuff, I care when the same people want to see their perverse interests made mainstream which is exactly what many people are arguing for, with concerningly vague terminology, in this thread. Gross.
ETA
Interesting you didn’t speak to beheading videos…