4 ms·
Nothing is censorship-free, but the social web (the fediverse) is just a bunch of websites. A website can be blocked at the DNS level, but that is exceedingly r
by rsolva 3y ago
Nothing is censorship-free, but the social web (the fediverse) is just a bunch of websites. A website can be blocked at the DNS level, but that is exceedingly rare. Other websites may choose to block your site for their community. That is the way of the web.
Each site has different rules and cultures. It's convenient to sign up at someone elses site, but you give up some control. Want to live by your own rules? Put up your own website and participate in the social web that way!
I run my own GoToSocial website, which is a Go project that is much simpler to install and maintain than Mastodon. Hit the sweetspot for me, at least.
- mvanbaak 3y ago> A website can be blocked at the DNS level, but that is exceedingly rare. This is done more then you think. Probably the most known one is thepiratebay for example
- timtom39 3y agoand archive.ph on cloudflare (nothing but CAPTCHAs)
- detaro 3y agothat's archive.ph's doing because they don't like cloudflare (there is a DNS extension where a DNS resolver forwards the prefix of the users IP to the DNS server of the site. Cloudflare does not use that, and archive.ph/.is says that they break their ability to properly host their site by doing that)
- rsolva 3y agoIt happens, but with limited effect and restricted to certain jurisdictions. My point is that the social web is not owned or controlled by any one commercial entity, just like the rest of the web. The pirate bay is blocked by law in Norway by the ISPs DNS servers, but is trivial to get around. It is a very soft kind of censorship, which is the beauty of the Internet.