Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FSE meets the FBI

blog.freespeechextremist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 159 posts

Re: FSE meets the FBI

#111

Post by blueflow »

lovich wrote: post #110
kstrauser wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hear variations of that logic so often and it’s frustrating. It’s impossible for me to infringe someone’s freedom of speech on the fediverse. Someone can spin up a brand new server right now and start saying whatever they want. I can’t stop them, even if I wanted to, which I don’t. But if I blocked them from my own server , some people are quick to complain about my “censorship”, or whatever. No. In exercising my f…

Yea, with his clarification in the other comment it’s clear that this guy is one of those types who probably calls himself a Libertarian while unironically advocating for the removal of people’s right to assembly

You were projecting hard in your last two comments - i generally do not think by constructed group identity. And i'm lost what parts of my wishes you consider authoritarian. I'm just pissed that instance admins install blocks that leave me unable to make my own decisions who i want to interact with - blocking people i like on my behalf.

Typical scenario is that someone gives me their fedi ident and i can't follow them because either my instance blocked theirs or theirs blocked mine.

Ideally i'd have a tool that knows all fedi blocks, where i can specify the people i want to follow and it tells me on what instance i need to register to be able to do that.

Re: FSE meets the FBI

#112

Post by KittenInABox »

blueflow wrote: post #104
lovich wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Caveat, I haven’t used mastodon or the fed inverse and might be off on the details. Isn’t that how the fediverse works? You sign up for an instance based on if you like how they admin it, and if you don’t, you join a different instance? I’m failing to see how that is a problem for users if they aren’t compelled to stay

Yes, but the different instance has a different set of blocks (both outgoing and ingoing), so the problem kinda persists even when you change instances. You can't have both A and B people in your feed when they (actually their admins) instance-block each other on sight.

Forgive me if I am not understanding:

Doesn't this mean you can just go to an instance that has mutual open communication with both other instances and then have access to both feeds? This is what happens IRL when I have two friend groups that don't engage, I engage with them both as a separate person.

Re: FSE meets the FBI

#113

Post by KittenInABox »

blueflow wrote: post #111
lovich wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea, with his clarification in the other comment it’s clear that this guy is one of those types who probably calls himself a Libertarian while unironically advocating for the removal of people’s right to assembly

You were projecting hard in your last two comments - i generally do not think by constructed group identity. And i'm lost what parts of my wishes you consider authoritarian. I'm just pissed that instance admins install blocks that leave me unable to make my own decisions who i want to interact with - blocking people i like on my behalf. Typical scenario is that someone gives me their fedi ident and i can't follow the…

Couldn't you just spin up your own instance that only consists of yourself in that case? I'm not being facetious I'm genuinely baffled as I thought this kind of custom plug-and-do-yourself-if-you-dont-like-it is fundamental to how fediverse works and is considered a "perk" of it.

Re: FSE meets the FBI

#114

Post by jchw »

GuinansEyebrows wrote: post #88
jchw wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aside from the obvious (it is clearly somewhat tongue-in-cheek, especially given the author's sense of humor) the truth is that the U.S. still has some unsettled business regarding what counts as protected speech. The past few decades have seen a lot of debate and legal back-and-forth regarding what to do with lolicon and shotacon illustrations, which FSE also addresses in another linked post[1]. (Not sure if any oth…

> The past few decades have seen a lot of debate and legal back-and-forth regarding what to do with lolicon and shotacon illustrations wild that of all the examples you could choose to bring up, this is the one. not saying the conversation doesn't need to happen, but i think there are a lot more concrete examples that affect many more people that come to mind first. for GP, there are a lot of other contested ideas ar…

As far as protected speech as it relates to the Internet and American law though, I don't think I've really seen anything that has been debated quite as much, and not only that, it actually seems to have picked up considerable heat over time rather than quieting down. It first came around (at least in any way that I noticed it) with the Chris Handley case in 2008 and has become a serious point of debate online especially with younger people.

Citizen's United isn't even really about free expression IMO, and I personally don't think people are all that split on it anyways, I think it's just a case where the people and the establishment disagree. BDS I'm simply not familiar with.

It does seem that there are new mounting challenges to free expression right now, but they're relatively new and it's unclear if they will stick around yet.

Re: FSE meets the FBI

#115

Post by blueflow »

KittenInABox wrote: post #112
blueflow wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but the different instance has a different set of blocks (both outgoing and ingoing), so the problem kinda persists even when you change instances. You can't have both A and B people in your feed when they (actually their admins) instance-block each other on sight.

Forgive me if I am not understanding: Doesn't this mean you can just go to an instance that has mutual open communication with both other instances and then have access to both feeds? This is what happens IRL when I have two friend groups that don't engage, I engage with them both as a separate person.

> go to an instance that has mutual open communication with both other instances

How do i find these neutral instances? I tried around some but with unsatisfying results.

Re: FSE meets the FBI

#116

Post by KittenInABox »

blueflow wrote: post #115
KittenInABox wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forgive me if I am not understanding: Doesn't this mean you can just go to an instance that has mutual open communication with both other instances and then have access to both feeds? This is what happens IRL when I have two friend groups that don't engage, I engage with them both as a separate person.

> go to an instance that has mutual open communication with both other instances How do i find these neutral instances? I tried around some but with unsatisfying results.

You make one? I thought spinning up an instance is designed to be easy.

Re: FSE meets the FBI

#117

Post by blueflow »

KittenInABox wrote: post #113
blueflow wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You were projecting hard in your last two comments - i generally do not think by constructed group identity. And i'm lost what parts of my wishes you consider authoritarian. I'm just pissed that instance admins install blocks that leave me unable to make my own decisions who i want to interact with - blocking people i like on my behalf. Typical scenario is that someone gives me their fedi ident and i can't follow the…

Couldn't you just spin up your own instance that only consists of yourself in that case? I'm not being facetious I'm genuinely baffled as I thought this kind of custom plug-and-do-yourself-if-you-dont-like-it is fundamental to how fediverse works and is considered a "perk" of it.

Uh. That would actually solve the problem, but at the cost of having to operate that setup. I saw many people who self-hosted their instance but it seemed rather stressful dealing with some technical aspects, so initially didn't consider it.

Currently researching managed fedi hosting...

Re: FSE meets the FBI

#118

Post by thwarted »

blueflow wrote: post #117
KittenInABox wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couldn't you just spin up your own instance that only consists of yourself in that case? I'm not being facetious I'm genuinely baffled as I thought this kind of custom plug-and-do-yourself-if-you-dont-like-it is fundamental to how fediverse works and is considered a "perk" of it.

Uh. That would actually solve the problem, but at the cost of having to operate that setup. I saw many people who self-hosted their instance but it seemed rather stressful dealing with some technical aspects, so initially didn't consider it. Currently researching managed fedi hosting...

> That would actually solve the problem, but that the cost of having to operate that setup.

So you expect someone else to incur that cost and not exercise control over how their resources are used, so you can use it for free/low effort?

Re: FSE meets the FBI

#119

Post by watwut »

lovich wrote: post #99
blueflow wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its less a translation thing, but: I do not consider it offensive, yet i have to accommodate these sensitivities while the reverse is not considered.

There is zero real world scenarios where someone who is communicating in English in the modern day, call someone an n-word and does not mean for it to be offensive. You mean, you personally weren’t the target of an insult and you apparently are mystified as to why any other people’s feelings are taken into consideration

Nazi and KKK consider it proper valid word, the only one that actually expresses who and what they have in mind. Their goal is not directly to offend, just to express how they feel about some people.

As far as they are concerned, the worst offense against propriety you can do is to ... call them racists. That is totally always unfair.

Re: FSE meets the FBI

#120

Post by blueflow »

thwarted wrote: post #118
blueflow wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh. That would actually solve the problem, but at the cost of having to operate that setup. I saw many people who self-hosted their instance but it seemed rather stressful dealing with some technical aspects, so initially didn't consider it. Currently researching managed fedi hosting...

> That would actually solve the problem, but that the cost of having to operate that setup. So you expect someone else to incur that cost and not exercise control over how their resources are used, so you can use it for free/low effort?

Valid concern... but my conclusion from that is that the Fediverse is just a bunch of personal lawns you'd better stay away from.
Post reply on HN