Moderation on the fediverse seems to be quite a fashionable topic those weeks 😄 See for example the latest thread in a serie of @roko 's

I think the point might be that your Mastodon instance does not federate (yet) with my Friendica instance. Don’t know about @Awoo though as you seem to have already interacted with Lemmy

It is something one can do in their browser. For example in Firefox I use this extension. In Fennec F-droid I can directly do it from the “search” preferences.

See this thread (from Lemmy, click the “recycle” kind of logo):

♲ @jonuno@lemmy.ml:

(solved)Why cant i comment in other instances?

I would like to comment this post
lemmy.eus/post/5671
but asks me to log in. I am logged in in my instance and although I see people from ‘my’ instance commenting there too, when I try to log it says it does not find my account. Do I have to create an account in this instance first? What am I doing wrong?

deleted by creator

You are projecting what you consider bad to the majority of users.

I did not use any definition of “bad” here. I said that people staying there is not a sign of their superiority wrt federated network. The preexisting large userbase suffices to explain why it keeps being large.

They are not staying there because of “network effect”, they are staying because their “few basic functionalities” are satisfied.

Except that the few basic functionalities (posting, commenting, reacting, following) are not what sets them apart from their federated counterparts.

And when they look for alternatives, federated social media will always be inferior to centralised solutions.

You are stating this like a fact, yet you have not explained what the big advantage of centralization is. You actually start from the hypothesis that centralisation is the core thing that everyone wants, even needs.

You have become the same thing you wanted to destroy.

Yes, and that went pretty fast. A few comments ago the majority of users were the developpers themselves, and suddenly they are a crowd whose fate is decided by a restricted elite.

Again, what is your better alternative?

Which “Lemmy app” are you talking about?
1st step : make sure that the devs of the app in question are aware of the problems that you want to be fixed.

I meant that the people who actually make use of federation are almost exclusively programmers. The rest of the users don’t benefit from federation.

Curious to see what numbers you are basing yourself on. I think most users use federation, as in communicate with users on other instances. As a fapsi.be user, don’t you mostly communicate with users from other instances?

It’s okay to let a few hands hold all the power, as long as their interests align with ours. Your philosophical disagreement with this concept has very little effect on reality.

What effect on reality does your agreement have though? If you want to trust benevolent dictators to stay benevolent and choose benevolent successors, let’s agree to disagree.

That’s not what i said,

It was suppose to be an example to the statement :

Why do you think all of the Fediverse has the same boring demographic of privalaged keyboard warrior programmers pretending like they are leading the revolution against big tech? And why is it that whenever another demographic arrives as refugees, they immediately demand defederation or die out immediately?

Lemmygrad don’t want to defederate from a population of “keyboard warrior programmers”, they want to defederate from “libs”, by which they actually mean anyone that is not both ML and anti-west.

As long as big tech can meet the needs of people, they will keep using their services.

Except that, because of network effet, people will keep using the service no matter how bad it becomes, as long as it keep a few basic functionalities? I use Facebook, not because I like the way it is, but because:

• all my IRL friends are there
• some job announcements appear only there

What is implied in your message is that is people keep using the service, it means it is a good one, as if there were no other constraints. How is this not an apology of capitalism?

The majority of the people don’t have any problem with this, why should they change their ways because some nerds decided that making a facebook account is a sin?

The majority of people don’t see a problem in capitalism either, does it mean one should stop advocating against it.

Facebook is a company that harvests users’ data and attention, under the hood of some social networking capabilities. Having a facebook account is not a sin, but it is exposing oneself to that, as well as pressuring one’s friends into doing the same, as I mentioned above. Federation aims at providing alternative for that.

(e.g., ads; users want as little as possible, big tech wants the maximum). If you want to solve the problems of users, you should first figure out irreconcilable contradictions like this

The fact that all successful big tech apps have ads is not because nobody had the idea of providing alternatives that are lighter in ads. It is because at some point they reached such a big size that network effect would be sufficient to keep users there anyway. Is your solution to that just hoping that someday one platform will be created that will be free of ads even when it reaches such sizes?

Federation aims at that, by allowing to build a big network without a single person being able to impose marketing choices over the whole network

off-topic : Not sure you’ve noticed since you pasted the link, but this was actually a quote-sharing of your post. On Mastodon or Lemmy, the kind of “recycle” logo links to your post.

Related thread started by @humanetech a few days ago

♲ @humanetech@mastodon.social:

The AI Art Apocalypse. Is the future for many Artists looking bleak, with AI’s like DALL-E 2 on the rise?

alexanderwales.com/the-ai-art-…

Hacker News discussion: news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3…

#art #artwork #artist #AI #DALLE #poll

See this related idea by @roko , where admins can block instances, but the user can unblock them for themself

I do not understand what makes centralization analogous to industrialization rather than to centralization of the means of production.

the real source of the supposed freedom that federation gives is open source.

What is the point of being able to replicate the software if you cannot use it to connect to your friend’s network?
In fact, federation is what enable to centralize the network (arguably the mainstream media’s strength) without having to centralize the power (arguably their misdeed).
If, in your opinion, the problem of big tech is not the centralization of power within a few hands, please explain what it is.

The Fediverse has no real users except the developers themselves

The Fediverse has 5 millions of users. I don’ t think more than 100 of them are developers.

you can checkout hexbear.net which runs an older version of lemmy without federation, they are just as active if not more than lemmygrad (very similar userbase) the only difference is that they don’t have to deal with the inherent problems of federation

Sure, if the goal is to build a filter bubble, then having to communicate with external users can be a problem. To add to this:

well i guess you missed the latest drama on lemmygrad where they where asking to purge all the liberals from lemmy.ml.

Lemmygrad users do not complain about the rest of the Fediverse speaking only about tech and federation, they complain about them disagreeing with their view.

In your example, you are assuming that the Facebook userbase actually cares about the messaging protocol.

When did I say anything of the sort? Why would they have to drop a functionnality just because a lot of people do not care about it? Before, people with no Facebook account could communicate with Facebook users via XMPP. Now they have to create a Facebook account for that. Facebook did not remove the feature because it was convenient for some users, they did it to trap more users in. This is the thing people want to escape with federation.

Please stop jacking off to the mirror.

Quit your bullshit

Just admit it goddamnit, you’re a corporate shill who’s resentful about anything that tries something different.

Be better, stop being so narcissistic.

Just shows how shallow your goddamn worldview is

I think you are abusing the word “ad hominem” here : the words she uses to describe techie freedom enthousiasts are quite hard, but she does have a point that the Fediverse is mostly made of them, as opposed to the more general audience of centralised platforms.

In fact, I am getting much more “ad hominem” vibes from your comments.

Fediverse claims to be “for the people by the people,” but if you examine any real Fediverse project, you can see how it’s actually “for the system admins by the programmers.”

Good point.
Wouldn’t that be a sign that the Fediverse is still in an early adoption phase rather than a feature of federation itself?

And why is it that whenever another demographic arrives as refugees, they immediately demand defederation or die out immediately?

Do you have example of people demanding defederation because they are non-techie?
From the top of my head, these are 3 examples of stable communities that do not focus on tech :

• mastodon.art
• climatejustice.social
• lemmygrad.ml

the solution to capitalism is not abandoning the productive forces it gave us to go back to primitive communism

I fail to understand what your proposed solution to capitalism is in this case. You seem to imply that the solution to capitalism is to forget that it is a problem. Am I missing something?

Centralized social media is a superior and progressive technology that makes internet communication accessible to the people.

Centralized media are easier to understand, and so are more accessible. The need to chose an instance is also an obstacle from a responsibility perspective : if I join a small instance, am I a burden for whoever runs it?
Should I donate? When I encounter a problem, should I bother the admin.

I do think that it would help the fediverse to have some ad-based instances where people can join without that kind of difficulties, of questionment, of guilt of being a user rather than a contributor.
I would not consider this a problem as long as it still federates.
As long as it only shows its ads to its own user but allows them to communicate also with ones that do not want to submit themselves to the ad-model.
That is the freedom that I think the Fediverse is built around : being able to use a platform without being trapped.

I do not see the advantage in them being walled gardens.
I think them being closed is the result of them abusing the power that their large userbase gives them, rather than a feature that is good for the users.
To take a specific example : Facebook Messenger did not drop XMPP because they had to, they dropped it because they could afford it.

to satisfy their regressive notion of decentralization.

What is so regressive about federation?

Whatever was released under MIT will be available under MIT in perpetuity.

I agree with your general point, but I would have used “can” rather than “will”. They will be available as long as anyone hosts them, but Microsoft has no obligation to host the MIT version forever. (this is not a specificity of the MIT license)

Maybe it would be useful to save them their readme on wayback machine, so as to be able -in case of a future dispute- to prove that Microsoft had MIT’d it at some point.

@poVoq

This is very explicitly about North Korea (and others) running their ransomware operations at a profit through tornado cash.

I fail to understand how different that is from the examples cited by @SineNomineAnonymous . They are charged with "hav[ing] failed to address their use as illegal money laundering services. ". Did @torproject manage to address their use as a child porn sharing service?

deleted by creator

No, I’ve seen tones of insults slung around on lemmy.

Mind to share examples that were not modded out?

these libs have chosen me as meal of the day

How is this not playing the victim? You are pushing a narrative where there is a group of liberals that every once in a while tricks the admins into having a marxist banned, and today it happened to be you. Can you point to an example of that ever happening to someone else?

In this post where an admin invited readers to check the modlog and appreciate the good quality of moderation, people are mentioning you for seemingly benefitting from laxist moderation. Do you find that unfair?