Cat pictures need a trigger warning? Wonder what the triggering effect is there?
I can see Linux advice though: kill, mount, etc.
31–40 of 410 posts
Cat pictures need a trigger warning? Wonder what the triggering effect is there?
I can see Linux advice though: kill, mount, etc.
All roads lead back to centralization lol.
It's either centralized and moderated system wide or decentralized and moderated locally.
The problem with being connected and moderated locally is your creating global moderation problems for a local system, typically that means massive amounts of work for said moderators.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you mean "misandry?"
> Do you mean "misandry?" No, OP is being transphobic and referring to trans women as men: > Note that the "banning controversy" is that they're not banning enough people for having entirely mainstream political opinions, and mostly targets journalists. Or let's be more specific: mostly targets people who don't think that men can identify into being victims of misogyny.
[flagged]
You can't be serious. I don't use neither X nor bluesky, but I did get an X account for a while so I could check the links in random news or conversations, and half the posts had unrelated Nazi messages just below. Not 'oh that's right wing so he's a Nazi' comments, I mean literal swastikas and kkk uniforms.
For example, there were a shocking number of posts against the proposed digital ID system because it's being advocated for by "Larry Ellison, a Jew". That's a verbatim quote, BTW. Uh, excuse me? There are plenty of valid reasons to dislike Larry Ellison, but his supposedly being Jewish is 100% not one of them. But there it was, up front and proud: oppose this thing because Jews are pushing for it!
That was one example of a great many loathsome things I saw there, and before anyone asks, no, I didn't see any leftwing equivalent content. Not saying it's not on there, just that it was not on my default timeline.
> However, as time has gone by, Bluesky’s traffic has declined (X’s has as well) and some of its users have become increasingly upset at its moderation decisions, including allowing U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance and anti-trans writer Jesse Singal to remain as users of the platform. So the expectation is that the vice president of the United States should be banned because he says stuff people don't like? What's the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The only major decentralized forms of social media that I'm aware of that have confronted philosophical questions of how handle moderation have been Mastodon, Bluesky, and arguably Lemmy. I don't know of any sense in which Mastodon has increased centralization, I think its blocking tools have been distributed essentially since the beginning, not something that has iterated toward centralization over time in response…
The big example that comes to my mind is Matrix, where most homeservers use Mjolnir to apply centralized public blocklists of other servers/people they don't like. So if for example #archlinux disagrees with your opinion and they decide to ban you for it, you are now banned from many other unrelated channels. I have also seen subreddits that auto-ban users that have ever posted in specific other (unrelated) subreddit…
https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/blob/msc2313/propos... is how it works fwiw.
I don't understand how you can "ban" anyone from distributed social media. The idea seems... outdated? I mean, I get "ignoring" someone so they don't show up when you log into whatever instance you're in, whether it's the AT Protocol or ActivityPub, but like... if someone somehow decides to do work on top of one of these protocols and extend it to allow people to basically comment on things that a victim user doesn't…
> However, as time has gone by, Bluesky’s traffic has declined (X’s has as well) and some of its users have become increasingly upset at its moderation decisions, including allowing U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance and anti-trans writer Jesse Singal to remain as users of the platform. The problem, if you can call it that, is Singal hasn't broken any of their TOS or guidelines. Right now, AFAICT this is a people with pi…
[flagged]
And beyond the technical details, how can a corporation commit to transparency and non-bias when their very funding depends on it? Google already provided us with the most popular example of how this is not possible (“don’t be evil” by an ad company).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Well, no, he did clearly break the TOS back when he originally joined. Care to explain? The links in the article re: potential violations are mostly BS.
Doxxing people off-platform used to be against the ToS. When people began reporting him for that, Bluesky amended their ToS.
People mix up “users wanting him banned for having abhorrent views” (which is the opinion of some people) with “users wanting him banned for the same stuff they see other people get banned for”. It serves as a kind of cover because even when you point to a concrete example of him violating the rules the moderation team will dismiss your report as being personally motivated. It’s a funny defense, “This guy couldn’t possibly be breaking the rules and be near-universally considered an asshole by the users on this site! It has to be one or the other!”