problematicconsumer

joined 1 year ago
[–] problematicconsumer@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And as someone who lived most of my life under an authoritarian regime, I don't respect your advocation for censorship. If you knew the effect of thinking you know better than anyone and can decide for them, you would never make such comments.

[–] problematicconsumer@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

But no one is forcing you to comment! You've expressed your opposition and I respect your opinion!

[–] problematicconsumer@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (5 children)

At this point I'm getting bad vibes from you TBH! I've expressed my opinion and apparently some people find it compelling and some disagree, that's fine!

[–] problematicconsumer@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Well, it was always my opinion! No one's opinion is a fact, necessarily. Let's agree to disagree! glhf

[–] problematicconsumer@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (9 children)

Social Consensus! This should be part of the culture that unless some instance is factually harming us or content there is illegal (for jurisdiction of the hosted instance) we should not defederate.

[–] problematicconsumer@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (11 children)

Did you really just equate trying to leave an authoritarian country with signing up for a different federated instance?

Yes I am, you are suggesting I don't know the meaning of these words, so I've provided an example of the exact same situation (importance doesn't change meaning of words here, does it?)

If you censor me, you have censored me! The fact that you're a government or admin of instance doesn't change word's meaning.

this is probably some nuance you should have provided in your original post where you only say that calling for defederation makes you a “dictator” and in no way indicate that there are situation where you think defederation is appropriate.

In hindsight, I should've but in response to most comments I've acknowledged that it's fine in a lot of situations

But second of all, how would you enforce what you are proposing? If larger instances were prevented somehow from defederating, wouldn’t that require some sort of “authority” making that decision for those instance? That doesn’t seem to align with your values based on what you’ve posted.

May I ask what made you think I'm looking for enforcement here? I believe in human coordination and freedom of choice. If I join a general instance, I don't expect admins to decide who I can interact with, that's all!

[–] problematicconsumer@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (13 children)

No one is stopping you to migrate from an authoritarian country either (most of the time) and yet they're called authoritarian. Also, I'm not saying instances “shouldn’t be allowed to defederate”, I'm saying advocating for this on a general instance with 100K users is wrong. If this was a niche or small community with agreed upon and shared values (like beehaw for example) that would be understandable.

Saying things like “Oh, But You Can Run Your Instance” is dismissive of the issue, There's literally no option to migrate accounts and expecting average users to deal with this mess is beyond me.

[–] problematicconsumer@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (15 children)

no instance ever defederate for any reason

did I say this?!

Also advocating for defederation (censorship) on an instance with 100K users is dictatorship. specially when you can't prove that said instance is harmful.

[–] problematicconsumer@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (17 children)

If you cared enough to read my post (or comments under maybe) you would've seen that I have no problem with defederation in general. My issue is defederation of general instances with 10s of thousands of users for literally no reason but FUD. If you can prove that some other instance is harmful, you should definitely consider defederating

[–] problematicconsumer@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Can you elaborate?

I have no problem with people making educated decisions or ask for change based on facts. Fully agree about quality over quantity as well. My issue is FUD, having no idea what you're talking about and still trying to convince everyone of that is harmful. When people working day and night on these protocols say there are no privacy concerns and no one can show you ads etc. and yet someone with literally zero understanding of the matter claims otherwise.

[–] problematicconsumer@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Exactly, I have a lot of normie friends that use threads, I don't want to use it but would love to interact with them. Best of both worlds

0
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by problematicconsumer@lemmy.world to c/fediverse@lemmy.world
 

Everywhere I look there are people advocating for defederation from this and that! Do you even understand what you're suggesting? Do you get what's the point of decentralized social media and activity pub?

This is supposed to be free and accessible for everyone. We all have brains and can decide who to interact with.

If meta or any other company manages to create a better product it's just natural that people tend to use it. I won't use it, you may not use it and it's totally fine! It's about having options. Also as Mastodon's CEO pointed out there's no privacy concern, everything stays on your instance.

Edit: after reading and responding to many comments, I should point out that I'm not against defederation in general. It's a great feature if used properly. Problem is General Instances with open sign-ups and tens of thousands of users making decisions on par of users and deciding what they can and can not see.

If you have a niche or small community with shared and agreed upon values, defederating can be great. But I believe individual users are intelligent enough to choose.

view more: next ›