4 ms·

None of those things get eliminated by decentralization, they get distributed to whatever the point of control / ownership is. Mastodon still requires security

None of those things get eliminated by decentralization, they get distributed to whatever the point of control / ownership is. Mastodon still requires security, compliance and moderation. And those requirements are going to keep getting more challenging by the year. It'll end up being another reason nobody will want to host content in a decentralized manner, the burden will become obnoxious.

hosh 3y ago
An organization trying to maintain an ISO certification will have drastically different policies and controls than a small shop, or even a hobbyist group. Everyone (theoretically) would be complying to statues in its broadest sense, but jurisdiction, regulations, industry best practices, reporting requirements, and appetite for risk is going to be different from organization to organization. It’s not one-size-fits-all. So some of these things are eliminated because the people hosting those are not put under the same kind of scrutiny as say, a Twitter.
- jeremyjh 3y ago
  The scrutiny from investors, legal and compliance exists because the risks are real, and they don't go away just because there isn't a Serious Business involved. Once someone operating one of these is publicly damaged, the risk will be better understood and marked up accordingly.
  - hosh 3y ago
    They sure are, which brings back to the point: how much did this implementation of Mastadon adequately addressed these risks with the reduced code count?
    - jeremyjh 3y ago
      I assumed this is just marketing, so it addressed the risks by never operating a public instance.
Fomite 3y ago
During the first wave of Twitter exodus, several people in my professional circle asked if they should be hosting professional, field-specific Mastadon servers, etc. My answer, born of moderating a modestly sized forum, was "Absolutely not under any circumstances."

hosh 3y ago

An organization trying to maintain an ISO certification will have drastically different policies and controls than a small shop, or even a hobbyist group. Everyone (theoretically) would be complying to statues in its broadest sense, but jurisdiction, regulations, industry best practices, reporting requirements, and appetite for risk is going to be different from organization to organization. It’s not one-size-fits-all. So some of these things are eliminated because the people hosting those are not put under the same kind of scrutiny as say, a Twitter.

jeremyjh 3y ago
The scrutiny from investors, legal and compliance exists because the risks are real, and they don't go away just because there isn't a Serious Business involved. Once someone operating one of these is publicly damaged, the risk will be better understood and marked up accordingly.
- hosh 3y ago
  They sure are, which brings back to the point: how much did this implementation of Mastadon adequately addressed these risks with the reduced code count?
  - jeremyjh 3y ago
    I assumed this is just marketing, so it addressed the risks by never operating a public instance.

Fomite 3y ago

During the first wave of Twitter exodus, several people in my professional circle asked if they should be hosting professional, field-specific Mastadon servers, etc. My answer, born of moderating a modestly sized forum, was "Absolutely not under any circumstances."