this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2024
103 points (96.4% liked)

Fediverse

36732 readers
130 users here now

A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).

If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!

Rules

Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (44 children)

But if a new instance is created after one was deleted, the new instance users will never have access to what was on that instance that got deleted.

We have "separate front ends" at the moment (guessing you're referring to apps, otherwise people log in through their instance's website), but the content the users have access to and the people they can interact with still depends on the instance they sign up on, I'm talking about eliminating that completely and letting the users be the ones that decide who and what they can interact with.

I'll never be able to check what's going on on beehaw or hexbear as long as my instance is the one I'm on, but no one should have the power to decide that for me or the other users I'm interacting with.

[–] rglullis@communick.news 3 points 1 year ago (20 children)

You are always free to run your own instance, and this is absolutely no different than "decentralizing" everything. The federation model where all users distrust each other degenerates into a fully p2p network.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (19 children)

And then admins from other instances can decide they don't want to federate with my instance, see how it doesn't solve anything?

[–] rglullis@communick.news 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Yeah, that's exactly the point! How do you think that a decentralized system is any different?!

If everything is "decentralized", you still must have a way to get rid of bad actors. Even nostr is set up in a way that you can not force your node into anyone else's relay.

Forgive my bluntness, but the more you try to argue you point the more it seems you have no clue what you are talking about. There are plenty of things to criticize about Lemmy and ActivityPub in general, but you are missing the mark on all of them.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Getting rid of bad actors is the job of the users (from their feed) and the mods (from the communities they moderate), no one should have the authority the admins have.

[–] rglullis@communick.news 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Admins still need to have control over what goes into the servers. If you are running a server and someone pushes content that is illegal in your jurisdiction, you can not go around asking users to please stop it for you.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No, but you can delete the illegal content from your server and other server owners can do the same on their side.

The way it works currently is no different for that, the person who controls the server can block IPs if they want.

What I'm saying is that if some servers are ready to host your content then it's the users' and moderators' decision to block it on their side.

[–] rglullis@communick.news 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

As a matter of governance, I agree with you: my instance is only blocking one instance and that's because they got reported for hosting CSAM. As an admin, I believe that my users are mature enough and smart enough to know how to filter out what they want to see.

But if you acknowledge that server admins can censor content on their servers, your complaint is only about the way that this is done, not the principle, and you agree that there needs to be an established hierarchy.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They can block content on their server, but as long as one server hosts the content, it would be available to anyone who wants to see it, which isn't how things work on Lemmy unless you want to sign up to a bunch of instances to make sure you have access to everything.

[–] rglullis@communick.news 2 points 1 year ago

If you just want to see the content, you don't need an account. You can just pull the data, like opening up a different website.

What you want is the ability for some other server to push content to a server that the admin might have chosen to say "no, I do not want to have data from them, and I do not want to have my resources used by these users".

load more comments (17 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)
load more comments (40 replies)