Live data from Hacker News

Diaspora Foundation: A Child-Porn Sharing Network

news.ycombinator.com

11–20 of 36 posts

Re: Diaspora Foundation: A Child-Porn Sharing Network

#11

This is the problem of decentralized, too open systems (aka anarchy): it enables terrorism, child porn, violent hate groups, organized crime and other extremists and criminals. There needs to be a reputation system and stronger limits to gradually give a user more access. Also, if they're required to pay for what they use (micropayment) to keep resources on servers, they're less likely to post illegal junk. Otherwise…

Filtering must be inbound, not outbound. Users should be able to broadcast whatever they want, including highly illegal stuff. Users should be able to filter whatever they receive, based on their individual preferences.

> Users should be able to broadcast whatever they want, including highly illegal stuff

Sorry, but I disagree here. Even in something that’s decentralized, the user relies on someone and that someone most definitely has the right (and ethical responsibility) to stop the spread of “highly illegal stuff.”

Re: Diaspora Foundation: A Child-Porn Sharing Network

#12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Filtering must be inbound, not outbound. Users should be able to broadcast whatever they want, including highly illegal stuff. Users should be able to filter whatever they receive, based on their individual preferences.

> Users should be able to broadcast whatever they want, including highly illegal stuff Sorry, but I disagree here. Even in something that’s decentralized, the user relies on someone and that someone most definitely has the right (and ethical responsibility) to stop the spread of “highly illegal stuff.”

"Highly illegal stuff" is relative, in time.and space.

How do you suggest we enforce that?

Re: Diaspora Foundation: A Child-Porn Sharing Network

#14
post #8

This is the problem of decentralized, too open systems (aka anarchy): it enables terrorism, child porn, violent hate groups, organized crime and other extremists and criminals. There needs to be a reputation system and stronger limits to gradually give a user more access. Also, if they're required to pay for what they use (micropayment) to keep resources on servers, they're less likely to post illegal junk. Otherwise…

I see it as a problem of moderation, which is notoriously tricky to do fairly, for any individual, and when you get a roomfull of techno-libertarians together it becomes insurmountable to reach consensus on the process. My takeaway is that federated networks need a federated moderation system, and they will become segmented when the "good" actors essentially ban / disconnect from the "bad" actors or just the uninitia…

I've been thinking a lot about moderating with online communications, decentralized and federated makes the solutions even more complex. It's not easy to filter when the people you want to filter have some tech knowledge. I've been dealing with that for years. One bad person in a country near this one has access to thousands of VPNs, and is simply unstoppable.

I've been kicking around the idea of having multiple filter options for each server and each user.

I am very interested in how others would tackle this. Particularly interested in blocking / filter options with matrix and similar systems.

I am imagining a block servers list, block cidr list, and a set of human moderators that can 'add on the fly' to a list they control - these lists being set to block by default. With options to whitelist individual users or ips on a server basis and per user basis.

I'd like to give each user an option to turn off these filters all at once, or whitelist different servers for example.

I also want to have a page showing for example, a blocklist of servers, and a blocklist of users, and a list of the moderators, like a list of nightclub 'bouncers' - so that people can make comments about them - if one bouncer does block lots of bad things, but also blocked a few people who had differing politics for example, it would be nice to have a way to see and discuss that and give people options to have a different bouncer blocking their message box.

There's some of my random thoughts on the issue, I'd like to see what others have come up with. When exploring rocket chat and similar, what I have seen so far is that these comm platforms are working with teams of non hostile users in mind and defending against the kind of issues initially described here is not really something any portal is prepared to handle well. Yet, hopefully. I have been asking about different mod tools and how to implement multiple layers for the various threats / issues.

I also think sometimes people in a group need to be set to not see new users to the group by default, and only after a certain amount of time can a newer user be seen by the main others in a group - things like that.

Re: Diaspora Foundation: A Child-Porn Sharing Network

#15
post #8

This is the problem of decentralized, too open systems (aka anarchy): it enables terrorism, child porn, violent hate groups, organized crime and other extremists and criminals. There needs to be a reputation system and stronger limits to gradually give a user more access. Also, if they're required to pay for what they use (micropayment) to keep resources on servers, they're less likely to post illegal junk. Otherwise…

I see it as a problem of moderation, which is notoriously tricky to do fairly, for any individual, and when you get a roomfull of techno-libertarians together it becomes insurmountable to reach consensus on the process. My takeaway is that federated networks need a federated moderation system, and they will become segmented when the "good" actors essentially ban / disconnect from the "bad" actors or just the uninitia…

There is no problem of moderation in decentralized systems, never was and never will be. Any system already assumes that you don't subscribe, follow or participate in things and communities you don't want to and you discover, choose and filter all the things you want yourself. That's how everything in the world works. Everything is inherently self moderated.

But there are actors who want to control the spread of information, have some global censorship features in every system with censorship decisions delegated to people who they can influence. These actors are also the ones who invented CP problem to be able do whatever they want to any target with public approval, like making bogus CP claims on anything that doesn't have a global censorship system to force creation of one. They may even upload CP themselves if necessary.

The good thing about ideologies though is that they do push people to protect ideological beliefs. You can't just CP your way into censorship on people with strong believes against censorship.

Re: Diaspora Foundation: A Child-Porn Sharing Network

#16
You used a headline grabbing/clickbait title such as Diaspora Foundation: A Child Porn Sharing Neywork, in order to draw attention to a lack of a federated moderation system in the Diaspora network system.

In my view this alone would be a good reason for you to be banned and cast out from those groups. FWIW I am not involved in those groups and I don't even know what happens in them, but the fact that you used such a title to draw attention to your cause shows that you have a cause which is not compatible with their ethos and other such decentralized systems.

Decentralized networks have arisen in response to centralized and privately controlled services like Twitter, Youtube, Facebook, Paypal and Patreon which use they term hate speech, neo-nazi, populist as excuses to ban those whose political and social views they disagree with, and you seriously expect them to adopt some sort of centralized control system. Good luck to you.

The same can be said of the TOR network, which seems to have become a system abused by all kinds of shady operators, with child pornography networks, bitcoin extortionists, Islamist propaganda networks among those operating behind the anonymity it offers.. Are there any calls for some kind OPTIONAL federated moderation systems for the TOR network?

How about Cloudflare, which has also come under criticism for protecting shady actors?

As for the child porn issue, the Internet itself can be seen as a child porn network irrespective of what tools or services are used to access it, and the same can be said about its so called relationship with hate speech. As Jordan Peterson asks, who defines what hate speech is?

As for the OPTIONAL part, things which are optional eventually morph into mandatory systems, with the possibility of operators who don't subscribe to such services being blocked simply for not using it..

Take a look at an organization such as Spamhaus, a supposedly optional but privately owned and controlled service, all the criticism and complaints of their abuse and misuse of a power over the years, and ask yourself why an organization committed to decentralized communication woud want such as system at the core of the services it provides.

I say this again, good luck to you!!

Re: Diaspora Foundation: A Child-Porn Sharing Network

#17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Users should be able to broadcast whatever they want, including highly illegal stuff Sorry, but I disagree here. Even in something that’s decentralized, the user relies on someone and that someone most definitely has the right (and ethical responsibility) to stop the spread of “highly illegal stuff.”

"Highly illegal stuff" is relative, in time.and space. How do you suggest we enforce that?

If I’m making a decision to delete something based on it’s legality, I refer to the laws that apply to me. Not that tricky.

Re: Diaspora Foundation: A Child-Porn Sharing Network

#18
I spent about a month or so tinkering with Diaspora and I feel your pain. Wherever free speech is paramount, it comes at a price. Some people feel that free speech and free "expression" shouldn't be free. I have rarely circled back to my Diaspora account since discovering similar disturbing images/messages.

If it's helpful to you, there are many other decentralized networks. So far as I can tell, Mastodon has better moderation controls that can block entire instances. It doesn't stop bad things from happening. The only confort I can gleam from that is that those who do/say terrible stuff do so at the risk of being seen and discovered.

Re: Diaspora Foundation: A Child-Porn Sharing Network

#19
post #13

You can report images of child sexual abuse to the Internet Watch Foundation, an organisation who works with law enforcement internationally to remove these images. https://www.iwf.org.uk/

Thanks, I have filed a complaint with them now. I've also notified the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. I basically filed a complaint naming the D* core devs as potentially involved in child sex trafficking. That's very disturbing to me.

Re: Diaspora Foundation: A Child-Porn Sharing Network

#20
post #9
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://github.com/diaspora/diaspora/issues/7464 And this one :) This is the thread they said was relevant to the discussion and that I should comment on, and then they banned me for "spamming" their issues ticket system when I commented on it.

I don't think it's discussing moderation that got you banned, but spamming github issues about it. A single issue should suffice. I can't verify it, but they refer to you spamming their discourse too. That said, I'd expect a discussion on this topic to be welcomed. The only reason they could reasonably be annoyed by you is if you keep rehashing points they've already discussed. In that case, the right approach would…

"Spamming" issue tickets? You mean leaving comments? "Spam" is an unsolicited advertisement for a product or service, I DEFINITELY did not do that, so I think you should be more precise with your language. They don't have a Terms of Service that says you are not allowed to make comments on issue tickets, so I did not violate any terms of service. IMHO "spamming" is the excuse that all censors use, when they censor you.
Post reply on HN