• 2 Posts
  • 24 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 4th, 2023

help-circle














  • I think your points are valid. There is still work to do to enable government amd corporate agencies to easily operate their own domain in fediverse. There are projects and server hosting providers that are making that easier but realistically we need to see those services become much more integrated with existing social media, website and email management tools ( Think software like Hootesuite, SproutSocial, HubSpot on the client side and GoDaddy, AWS, Azure, 1&1Ionos on the server side ) that include managed activitypub services to SMEs and corporates and a way of managing them. I see these being like email accounts, only available for use by the domain user but can exchange content through federation. Moderation in these cases is just like dealing with Spam (Which email providers already do) - I know these approaches mean that at the infrastructure level there is a tendency back to centralisation but the difference is that there is no lockin. A company/org/Person can take their website / domain to whatever infrastructure they want.








  • That is generally what Governments do. They write laws that say … you can do this but not that. If you do this thats illegal and you will be convicted. Otherwise you wouldnt be able to police things like Mafia and drug cartels. Even in the US their freedom of speech to conspire to committe crimes is criminalised. There is no difference between that and politically motivated ‘extremists’ who conspire to commit crimes. The idealogy is not criminalised the acts that groups plan or conduct are. You are totally fine saying . I dont like x group.

    What its not ok to say is . Lets go out and kill people from x.group.

    The problem is that social media sites use automated processes to decide which messages to put in front of users in the fundamentally same way that a newspaper publisher decides which letters to the editor they decide to put in their newspaper.

    Somehow though Tech companies have argued that because their is no limit on how many posts they can communicate amd hence theoretically they arent deciding what they put in and what they done, that their act of putting some at the top of people’s lists so they are seen is somehow different to the act of the newspaper publisher including a particular letter or not …but the outcome is the same The letter or post is seen by people or not.

    Tech companies argue they are just a commutation network but I never saw a telephone, postal or other network that decided which order you got your phone calls, letters or sms messages. They just deliver what is sent in the order it was sen.

    commercial social media networks are publishers with editorial control - editorial control is not only inclusion/exclusion but also prominence

    There is a fundamental difference in Lemmy or Mastodon in that those decisions (except for any moderation by individual server admins) dont promote or demote any post so therefore dont have any role in whether a user sees a post or not.