I think it's going to be more important than ever that #Mastodon and the #fediverse are not centrally operated out of the US unlike almost every other social media platform out there.
@gimulnautti > US stands a good chance of becoming much more oligarchic under Trump, with politics starting to seep into how the company leaders operate
Both the GoP and the DataFarmers have been looking with approval at the close relationship between the CCP and TenCent, ByteDance, Weibo, Baidu etc. The GoP because they imagine themselves being in charge of the DataFarms, like the CCP are in charge of theirs. The DataFarmers because they know in the US it's the other way around ...
@thibault I think it is a good thing that that is done on server level so people have a choice. If Mastodon wants to play a serious role in the social media landscape things are a little bit more complicated as black&white. @Gargron
But you didn't respond to Paul's point. Wasn't the whole point of Mastodon to provide an *alternative* client for an *open* network that no individual or company needs permission to use, allowing for a plurality of values and policies across instances?
By all means, pick an inherently walled technology if that's what you want, but asking Mastodon to be that seems like asking Mastodon not to be Mastodon.
@Starfia I think you are right. The open structure is the basics of the system. So far there are enough 'unwanted servers' around that don't get federated. With Threads it is not different.
- Both servers and individuals can set the bounderies they want. - (that is why the options are there!)
@vosje62 @Starfia @thibault but more importantly that subset of servers that does block all of dark fedi and threads and bluesky and gab and truth social, etc, are those servers expressing the freedom of the network the best
because you fail to comprehend the threat plutocrat, bigoted, and fascist actors represent to the freedom of the network
such opinions show how good it is that everybody can host a fediverse (not only Mastodon) server itself. So no admin can censor the network for me because he/she thinks that there is a dark fediweb e.g.
Beeing honest: i dont like it when users put pressure on admins of big instances to block other whole instances because they dont like the way they operate, or because they belong to companys like Meta etc. Its something totally different if admins block instances that are legally problematic.
If somebody does not like that fact that eg mastodon.social federates with Bluesky etc. he/she is free to block the mentionings for themselfs, switch to another Mastodon Instance with a different block policy or to run an own fediverse server.
The fediverse has that possibilities which you dont have when using x etc
From my point of view that is way better than to censor the network for all other users on the server.
I'm not invoking that argument. Freedom to instantiate and manage a server does allow a platform to (ridiculously) oppose such freedom, but of course doesn't amount to the right not to be blocked by anyone or everyone.
We seemed to be talking about the act of criticizing or opposing the policy that permits such criticism to begin with (such as a person exercising their right to free speech by vocally opposing free speech).
I agree that act is silly and obviously self-contradictory, but I don't think that means it should be an exception to protected speech. Free speech by nature permits all kinds of silly and ridiculous speech.
"We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal"
@benroyce > if someone uses their freedom, to destroy freedom, and we let them, then freedom itself will perish
I'm reminded of a video I saw of then-California Governor Arnie from Terminator. Who probably assumed he'd be free to give a political speech without getting egged on the way to the podium. But then he ...
(2/2) "... got an egg in the chest while walking out to give a speech during his special-election run to replace Gray Davis as governor of California in 2003."
"As the video shows, Schwarzenegger calmly shed his sport coat, and allowed security to wipe him off. He did not retaliate. Instead, he cracked some jokes (and in a longer clip, defends egging as a necessary part of free speech and vibrant political discourse): 'This guy owes me bacon now', he told reporters about the unidentified assailant."
@vruz The board of the 501c3 does not have any legal power over the German entity which holds all the assets. This is a concern I've already had in mind.
I can obviously imagine the concern has crossed your mind, but the idea that the German legal system can stop an insider attack seems not very well thought out.
@davey_cakes I am for interoperability. That is the underlying principle of the fediverse and how all the Mastodon and non-Mastodon platforms on the fediverse talk to each other.
well I would politely suggest that standards of conduct and safety are going to mean more to people than interoperability over the next while.
Perhaps now is a good time to address how to make the out-of-the-box Mastodon experience one where people aren't exposed to white nationalists by default.
more explicitly - Mastodon the company should start directly alerting people to which servers they REALLY need to think about blocking, and needs to do it at the install stage, and afterwards as routine.
@davey_cakes Improving the moderation experience by allowing admins to subscribe to shared blocklists is something we're planning for our next release, 4.4.
I'm aware, but is that largely streamlining an existing practice which people still need to be here a while to understand?
I've used shared blocklists.
I'd like the company to explicitly direct people to block lists of known problem servers, will that happen?
Will we move beyond the likelihood of what happened the DAIR server happening again, where people join Fedi on the promise of how progressive it is, and get put on blast by neonazis?
I've signed up with Univesedon because I like having backups.This instance was down for about 2 hours..I hope it's not a portent of what is going to happen.
Especially now that Chump is going to get to play President again and hand everything over to his rich friends, I think it's imperative that Mastodon plays a more active outreach role / PR to actively pull users away from BookFace, Shitter and the likes. Maybe some high profile partnerships with other like-minded orgs to actively promote their fediposts? All the FOSS / GNU / open society types of orgs should commit to making it their primary source, while only posting links on other platforms and their websites to their fedi-posts. Elon Musk needs to dread his decision to buy Shitter, and Troth Sential stock values need to tank to penny stocks. I haven't used Insta, Snap or TikTok to really know whether or not I'd hate them, but their ownership and control are problematic enough to relegate them "to the dustbins of history".
this is important. Very important. However, as this election has shown, the 'negative choice' is not enough. #Mastodon needs to be the positive choice. With features, innovations and services that go beyond what others are offering, and entice people to come and to stay.
Of course that's not just up to you or the GmbH, but the things people create around this. But you can help in setting the culture, and creating joy in the core apps and services.
Yeah, this is what I was saying a few days ago. TechHub will likely be moving our server to Canada, but I worry about the smaller servers run by a single person in the US, where that might not be an option.
I think it's going to be more important than ever that HUMANS are not centrally operated out of the US unlike almost every other social media platform out there.
What difference does it makes if the private messages here aren't still encrypted and can be accessed by the 3-letter US organizations as they wish even without your knowledge? They can harvest anything, any data about anyone they want from here and we all know exactly that something like this is possible. The weakest link is always the human. And if your moderators can read them, so can anyone else. Accidentally and on purpose. Even forcefully. That's pretty obvious. So.. you know.
One of the BIG things I like about Mastodon is that the host is subject to German laws. As a Jew this has given me some feeling of safety to post here. Thank you.
Which reminds me I probably ought to renew my donation.
At the same time, Meta is getting its hooks deep into this system, and how long until they move to the end of the embrace - extend - exclude - extinguish path they’ve followed for two damned decades?
All I can say right now is that I shut down my Twitter account this morning. Basically I made it private, logged off, and "forgot the password" so that nobody can use my old name as a spambot. I'm staying here on Mastodon, and will follow back all who follow me.
Yes, everyone needs to get the f**k off Threads, Bluesky, FB, and X/Twitter. These sites can be powerful tools for organizing, but the oligarchy is in full force right now and all the owners of those sites are part of that system. Mastodon is the only means of organizing that is not centrally owned.
the election result brought me here. As journalist (with European roots) its more than urgent we from independent media come into action to stand against US Media and support our friends in USA with ProDemocracy. I think I will mirror my podcast (hosted in USA) to the Fediverse eco-system. Have to figure out the details. motherjones.com/politics/2024/…
Toni Aittoniemi
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •100% agree. US stands a good chance of becoming much more oligarchic under Trump, with politics starting to seep into how the company leaders operate.
They won’t call it that obviously, because they’ll be oblivious to it. But politics it will be regardless.
They’ll call it business, but it will be politics agreed to in back rooms instead of government corridors.
Strypey
Als Antwort auf Toni Aittoniemi • • •@gimulnautti
> US stands a good chance of becoming much more oligarchic under Trump, with politics starting to seep into how the company leaders operate
Both the GoP and the DataFarmers have been looking with approval at the close relationship between the CCP and TenCent, ByteDance, Weibo, Baidu etc. The GoP because they imagine themselves being in charge of the DataFarms, like the CCP are in charge of theirs. The DataFarmers because they know in the US it's the other way around ...
@Gargron
thibault
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •🦊 Paul Schoonhoven 🍉 🍋
Als Antwort auf thibault • • •If Mastodon wants to play a serious role in the social media landscape things are a little bit more complicated as black&white.
@Gargron
Ben Royce 🇺🇦
Als Antwort auf 🦊 Paul Schoonhoven 🍉 🍋 • • •@vosje62 @thibault
i think it's pretty black and white that threads is the same company whose algos got us into this mess
i think anyone who sees working with meta as benign is naive, at best
and i think mastodon not blocking threads is deeply unserious
you don't get "to play a serious role" serving the very same malice that mastodon was created to oppose
you get laughed at and then discarded
Reinder Dijkhuis Does Art hat dies geteilt.
Steve Barnes
Als Antwort auf Ben Royce 🇺🇦 • • •@benroyce, @vosje62, @thibault –
But you didn't respond to Paul's point. Wasn't the whole point of Mastodon to provide an *alternative* client for an *open* network that no individual or company needs permission to use, allowing for a plurality of values and policies across instances?
By all means, pick an inherently walled technology if that's what you want, but asking Mastodon to be that seems like asking Mastodon not to be Mastodon.
Strypey hat dies geteilt.
🦊 Paul Schoonhoven 🍉 🍋
Als Antwort auf Steve Barnes • • •@Starfia I think you are right. The open structure is the basics of the system. So far there are enough 'unwanted servers' around that don't get federated. With Threads it is not different.
- Both servers and individuals can set the bounderies they want. -
(that is why the options are there!)
That's is how it works for all parties.
@benroyce @thibault
Ben Royce 🇺🇦
Als Antwort auf 🦊 Paul Schoonhoven 🍉 🍋 • • •@vosje62 @Starfia @thibault but more importantly that subset of servers that does block all of dark fedi and threads and bluesky and gab and truth social, etc, are those servers expressing the freedom of the network the best
because you fail to comprehend the threat plutocrat, bigoted, and fascist actors represent to the freedom of the network
BjoernAusGE
Als Antwort auf Ben Royce 🇺🇦 • • •such opinions show how good it is that everybody can host a fediverse (not only Mastodon) server itself. So no admin can censor the network for me because he/she thinks that there is a dark fediweb e.g.
That makes the fediverse a great network.
@vosje62 @Starfia @thibault
Ben Royce 🇺🇦
Als Antwort auf BjoernAusGE • • •@bjoern @vosje62 @Starfia @thibault
agreed
someone can make any network they want
any rules they want
but if their rules suck (bigotry, etc), they're relegated to obscurity
as they should be
we simply let the pieces fall where they may, and we stop pretending bigotry and tolerance can coexist
they can't
BjoernAusGE
Als Antwort auf Ben Royce 🇺🇦 • • •Beeing honest: i dont like it when users put pressure on admins of big instances to block other whole instances because they dont like the way they operate, or because they belong to companys like Meta etc. Its something totally different if admins block instances that are legally problematic.
If somebody does not like that fact that eg mastodon.social federates with Bluesky etc. he/she is free to block the mentionings for themselfs, switch to another Mastodon Instance with a different block policy or to run an own fediverse server.
The fediverse has that possibilities which you dont have when using x etc
From my point of view that is way better than to censor the network for all other users on the server.
@vosje62 @Starfia @thibault
Ben Royce 🇺🇦
Als Antwort auf Steve Barnes • • •@Starfia @vosje62 @thibault
I think at this point we're well past the "if you don't let plutocrats and nazis on your network you're a hypocrite" argument, wouldn't you agree?
Freedom doesn't mean letting actors who oppose freedom free reign- a logically sound point. There is no contradiction
Because we're talking about a social contract
I grant you as much rights as I grant myself
If you use those rights to say someone doesn't deserve rights, you've voided the contract and I owe you nothing
Steve Barnes
Als Antwort auf Ben Royce 🇺🇦 • • •@benroyce, @vosje62 –
I'm not invoking that argument. Freedom to instantiate and manage a server does allow a platform to (ridiculously) oppose such freedom, but of course doesn't amount to the right not to be blocked by anyone or everyone.
Ben Royce 🇺🇦
Als Antwort auf Steve Barnes • • •@Starfia @vosje62
i'm confused, maybe
this point: "ridiculously"
what do you mean
do you agree that the only way social media will ever function is if you block bigotry and trolls?
is that "opposing freedom" in your view?
i could be completely wrong, i'm just not getting a good bead on what you're saying here perhaps
Steve Barnes
Als Antwort auf Ben Royce 🇺🇦 • • •@benroyce, @vosje62 –
We seemed to be talking about the act of criticizing or opposing the policy that permits such criticism to begin with (such as a person exercising their right to free speech by vocally opposing free speech).
I agree that act is silly and obviously self-contradictory, but I don't think that means it should be an exception to protected speech. Free speech by nature permits all kinds of silly and ridiculous speech.
Ben Royce 🇺🇦
Als Antwort auf Steve Barnes • • •@Starfia @vosje62
what do you think of this:
everyone is assumed the right to free speech
but if you use that speech to attack freedom, you've abrogated the right
i'm not saying anything original nor profound
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_…
"We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal"
logical paradox in decision-making theory
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)Strypey
Als Antwort auf Ben Royce 🇺🇦 • • •@benroyce
> everyone is assumed the right to free speech
> but if you use that speech to attack freedom, you've abrogated the right
This is not a license granting permissions. It's an *inalienable* right.
Imagine if I argued;
Everyone has the freedom to grant or withdraw their labour.
But if you use that labour to attack that freedom, you've abrogated the right, so you get sold as a slave.
See the problem?
@Starfia @vosje62
Ben Royce 🇺🇦
Als Antwort auf Strypey • • •100% absolutely completely wrong
every right is a responsibility
when someone uses a right with irresponsible behavior which results in harm, they lose that right
whether explicitly, by crime and punishment
or implicitly, by pissing everyone else off and making them hate the irresponsible use of a right to abuse others
you need to learn this
this is an ironclad rule
says me?
no, says simple cause and effect
Ben Royce 🇺🇦
Als Antwort auf Ben Royce 🇺🇦 • • •@Starfia @vosje62
this isn't some weird moralistic hangup
it's purely functional
if someone uses their freedom, to destroy freedom, and we let them, then freedom itself will perish
therefore you must deny freedom to those who oppose freedom. to protect freedom
there's no contradiction nor hypocrisy
Strypey
Als Antwort auf Ben Royce 🇺🇦 • • •(1/2)
@benroyce
> if someone uses their freedom, to destroy freedom, and we let them, then freedom itself will perish
I'm reminded of a video I saw of then-California Governor Arnie from Terminator. Who probably assumed he'd be free to give a political speech without getting egged on the way to the podium. But then he ...
@Starfia @vosje62
Strypey
Als Antwort auf Strypey • • •(2/2)
"... got an egg in the chest while walking out to give a speech during his special-election run to replace Gray Davis as governor of California in 2003."
fastcompany.com/90321594/watch…
Did he respond by egging the guy back, or otherwise visiting retribution on him?
Strypey
Als Antwort auf Strypey • • •(3/3)
Nope.
"As the video shows, Schwarzenegger calmly shed his sport coat, and allowed security to wipe him off. He did not retaliate. Instead, he cracked some jokes (and in a longer clip, defends egging as a necessary part of free speech and vibrant political discourse): 'This guy owes me bacon now', he told reporters about the unidentified assailant."
fastcompany.com/90321594/watch…
Ben Royce 🇺🇦
Als Antwort auf Strypey • • •i don't understand what point you're trying to make
are you confusing racism, homophobia, transphobia, misogyny, etc., our real topic, with arnie getting egged?
our real topic is dehumanization. rights destruction. bigotry. freedom denial
you don't deal with that gracefully. no one can. because it's endless hate. it's not a one-off political event showing arnie has good style
you're confusing jaywalking with murder
Fred Rocha
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Atha Ahuluheluw
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Gary "grim" Kramlich
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •vruz
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Eugen Rochko
Als Antwort auf vruz • • •vruz
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Eugen Rochko
Als Antwort auf vruz • • •vruz
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Gerard Braad
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Nevarro
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Parade du Grotesque 💀
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Eugen Rochko
Als Antwort auf Parade du Grotesque 💀 • • •Parade du Grotesque 💀
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Into your complete and utter irrelevance.
Your instance accept anyone, even the worst spammers, and your little behind-the-scene backroom deals with FB and friends are fooling no one.
You have my respect fro writing something usable and useful but it is way past its due-date.
Eugen Rochko
Als Antwort auf Parade du Grotesque 💀 • • •MathiasTCK
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •J.Sʜᴀʀᴘ🌍🇺🇦Fʀᴇᴇᴅᴏᴍ&Dᴇᴍᴏᴄʀᴀᴄʏ
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Davey
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Eugen Rochko
Als Antwort auf Davey • • •Davey
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •well I would politely suggest that standards of conduct and safety are going to mean more to people than interoperability over the next while.
Perhaps now is a good time to address how to make the out-of-the-box Mastodon experience one where people aren't exposed to white nationalists by default.
You have a chance to do something.
Davey
Als Antwort auf Davey • • •Eugen Rochko
Als Antwort auf Davey • • •Torsten mag das.
Maxi 10x 💉 hat dies geteilt.
Davey
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •I'm aware, but is that largely streamlining an existing practice which people still need to be here a while to understand?
I've used shared blocklists.
I'd like the company to explicitly direct people to block lists of known problem servers, will that happen?
Will we move beyond the likelihood of what happened the DAIR server happening again, where people join Fedi on the promise of how progressive it is, and get put on blast by neonazis?
Xeno Danger Evil
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •JustRosy
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •LAUREN
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •xs4me2
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •inquiline
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Steve
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •GeekMiki
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •But yes, more than ever let's advocate for the #fediverse and #mastodon
Stéphane Bortzmeyer
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Feyter
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Dmian
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Chris
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Mary Hilton
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Steve 史蒂夫
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Andalmori
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Public Enemy Exposed
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Pedro Machado Santa
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •I agree. Still, what's the matter with Social Web Foundation? Honest question.
I see all these dubious companies over there. What's the game plan to have them (and their agendas) on the party?
Sebastian DO2SGF
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Dutch Investor
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Râu Cao ⚡
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Possumantha
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Tails - Home
tails.netAloniaxx
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Mitex Leo
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Christopher Manning
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Meanwhile in Canada
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Gondor
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Tim Ashley 🏳️🌈 💙🤎💜
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Kristoffer Lawson
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •this is important. Very important. However, as this election has shown, the 'negative choice' is not enough. #Mastodon needs to be the positive choice. With features, innovations and services that go beyond what others are offering, and entice people to come and to stay.
Of course that's not just up to you or the GmbH, but the things people create around this. But you can help in setting the culture, and creating joy in the core apps and services.
hicksy2
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Charles U. Farley
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Aurochs
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Stefan Urbat
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Raccoon🏳️🌈
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •James Veitch
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Basti 🇩🇪🇪🇺
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Luca da Firenze
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Mastodont and the Fediverse must be centrally operated out from US
this free media platform will not last long in US now
Isaiah Nathanael
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •EarthMomma
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •B-Sizzle
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •patricus
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •stavpup
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Confrontation Jacen
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Verdant Square Network
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •nicdex 🇨🇦 🇺🇦
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Martin Be
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •They can harvest anything, any data about anyone they want from here and we all know exactly that something like this is possible. The weakest link is always the human. And if your moderators can read them, so can anyone else. Accidentally and on purpose. Even forcefully. That's pretty obvious. So.. you know.
vlakicas
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Stefan Laser🗜️
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Ayo :Ayco:
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •LiquidParasyte
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •please, please, please work with your peers in the Fediverse software space to prioritize nomadic identity migration and instance/domain migration
Being able to move to a new instance while retaining the post history is going to be crucial in the coming times.
Wyatt H Knott
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •One of the BIG things I like about Mastodon is that the host is subject to German laws. As a Jew this has given me some feeling of safety to post here. Thank you.
Which reminds me I probably ought to renew my donation.
wendinoakland
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •sahilrajput03
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •GG
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •🄲🅈🄱🄴🅁🅃🅄🄺🄺🄴🅁
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Aphrodite ☑️ :boost_ok:
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •martin lentink 🇪🇺 🍋 🟥
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •btkrth
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •mhoye
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Chuck Miller
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Tyler C.
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •AppleWoi
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Wandering Star
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Digit PaxMentis
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Billionaire-owned news is not our only option
Mother Jonescultdev
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Subby_SAB
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Matthias Pfefferle
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •Simon
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •OpenSoul ✅
Als Antwort auf Eugen Rochko • • •