I’ve been trying Lemmy for a little while and wasn’t sure how to feel about it.
Today, I wanted to start blocking the most high-censorship instances until I could find a fully zero-censorship instance and simply block all the ones with censorship. Filter bots, not people.
When I looked into it further, I found out there are no zero-censorship instances, because Lemmy relies on a broken “federation” system where each instance is supposed to be able to fetch posts from other instances, but it’s never been finished to reach a fully working state. Lemmy’s official docs say you can’t even do federation over Tor at all. This means it uses DNS, so it won’t actually allow Lemmy instances to fetch posts from each other freely, it just gets blocked instantly and easily, every time the authorities feel like blocking anything.
So you can only ever have the “average joe lemmy” and “average joe reddit” with everything approved by the authorities, and then “tor copies of lemmy” and “tor copies of reddit” where you have free speech but you can only reach other nerds.
People seem to think Lemmy is different because this weird censorship fetish is extremely popular and most of you are happy to see bans happen to certain people, not just bots, so a small Lemmy that censors certain people feels fundamentally different from a big reddit that censors more people. But it’s the exact same thing, it’s reddit.
When reddit was smaller, you could say basically anything you wanted there, they just wouldn’t let it reach the main audience. Then it got too big, and any tiny part of the audience you could reach would be too big, so they won’t let you talk at all.
Lemmy is now the small part of reddit where you can say whatever you want, separated from the main audience, until too much growth happens and you have to move again.
It’s not actually a solution to reddit. It’s not designed to be different, it’s designed to match the past today and then match reddit’s present tomorrow, while being part of a system that’s about the same in past, present, and future.
Last year, this year, and next year, you’re posting somewhere it won’t be seen by many people, and the system that charges people for ambulance rides is getting another year of ambulance ride revenue, facing no organized resistance. There’s no difference here.
Lemmy urgently needs federation between onion service instances and DNS addresses in order to actually do what most users seem to wish it would do: allow discussion outside what the corporate authorities allow, while outgrowing reddit & helping undo the damage social media has done to human communication.
Yes, you did. Not sure how you think an unmoderated community on TOR being full of CSAM would somehow make it likely to catch extra pedophiles.
You deserve a better answer, and i can be more clear.
In my opinion, CSAM should be banned and automatically reported to authorities, which is already the law anyway so a website allowing it should be banned, and there’s not enough will to crack on the pedocriminals on Tor(, i don’t believe that people using it are really anonymous unless they use a specific computer), his point was to avoid any slippery slope with simple rules such as “only banning spam”, apart from the other justifications cited above, he also writes « I’m not saying we need to pressure France to arrest a bunch of French film directors for scenes with naked girls as soon as Trump or his replacement finds it politically convenient to label such things as so-called “illegal content.” » here
What he’s scared of is these kind of censorship abuses : when you begin to open the door it’s hard to keep it closed.
I.m.o. he should have kept the concept of a simple rule, while extending it to include CSAM, or instruction on how to make a dirty bomb for example.
You’re right to help him see the limits of the freedom of expression, and while i agree with his fear of censorship excesses while censoring CSAM, i also don’t think that not censoring it is the right solution.
An obvious example of excesses based on good intentions would be censoring “hate speech” or “disinformation”.
Yeah, I wasn’t about erotic films from France. That point had nothing to do with anything. I kept it specifically to CSAM.
Okay, so he’s openly in favour of decriminalising CSAM then. Got it.
Not sure that’s a good look.
And he talked about the risk of a slippery slope
Not sure that refusing to see the good in him gives you a good look
He’s been unpleasant to absolutely everyone in this thread repeatedly, has his own weird definitions for terms that he assumes everyone has, makes claims, refuses to back them up, complains about everyone, accuses them of trolling him or acting in ‘bad faith’.
What good is there to see here?
Everyone has been unpleasant with him, causes and consequences
Then he’d be wrong, but no doubt he’d disagree with you and that you’re once again holding an uncharitable view of what he wrote
You’re the stereotype of someone acting in bad faith with your stupid obsession on CSAM that refuses to understand what his thoughts are, almost accusing him of secretly being a pedophile all along while he clearly stated his reasons/fears
His ideals
I don’t see the conversation going anywhere, and i don’t know enough of his p.o.v. to defend him, i added an answer 10mns ago because you’re right when you say that CSAM should be banned, and he could have agreed with you if you at least tried to understand why he was opposed to it.
Strongly disagree.
I don’t tend to look at people charitably who tell me they want child porn decriminalised.
That’s more-or-less the only type of content that he’s referring to here when he wants the Fediverse to embrace TOR. That’s the only stuff it could be legally liable for. That and maybe terrorism and solicitation of pirated content.
What’s good about them?
I don’t think free speech absolutism is good.
That’s exactly what someone acting in bad faith would say.
You absolutely know without a doubt that he doesn’t want child porn to be decriminalised, i quoted him saying the opposite a few comments ago, yet you’re more obsessed with turning his sentences in a bad way than honestly seeking to understand his p.o.v.
That’s interesting, because (edit : it makes me understand your view better, however )that’s not my p.o.v., and he repeatedly, over and over, insisted on the censorship of political opinions, here as well that’s something you really should have known by reading him
Oh, so he wants it remained criminalised - but people shouldn’t remove it from their websites if someone posts it?
Okay, and you don’t need TOR to make a lemmy instance where there is no censorship of political opinion. There are likely lemmy servers that already exist that do what he wants if its purely about no political censorship.