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.
Edit - I was banned from my instance, and before being unbanned, some of my comments seem to have been removed. I apologize if I hurt anyone’s feelings, but it seems pointless to try to discuss this topic here. I’ll give a few more replies, and then suggest any further responses be directed to me on nostr, where there are no bans. I’ve also had a good time posting on PieFed while I was banned, so I’ll probably keep spending time there. If anyone’s curious, I had a thread about this topic on PieFed too. Btw, instead of the misplaced focus on bots, I should have said filter spam, not people earlier in this post.
According to you almost everyone on earth is a “piece of shit” then and that no-one is worth forgiveness for you.
Like this is a borderline misanthropic mentality.
What if they have relatively urgent business across the world?
So I guess people should just hardly leave their geographical area then.
Yes, I do. It guts the business.
You got any data for this claim? Are you alleging that we should allow historical incidents, recordings of CSAM online in the hope, the idea that it would put-off pedophiles from trying to specifically do it to new victims to get their fix?
So we all have to witness and host CSAM on our websites because of this?
Why?
Why does taking CSAM down make it harder to “reach a future where everyone’s positions are clarified”? What does that even mean? Why would it protect abusers?
Well separate from concerns about the account posting it, people find it utterly disgusting and inhumane and don’t want to see it on websites they visit.
You got any data that backs this claim up?
So you outright openly pro people’s right to share child porn online.
Yes, admins would have to put up with that. But normal users of a community don’t want to see it and would expect it removed.
Incorrect, and you seem to have a habit of making up shit to say and adding “according to you” like I’m the one that said it.
Stop being that way, then, I guess.
As I said, that is what jet engines are appropriate for. Business which is relatively urgent in the context - so, relative to climate change. For example, transporting organs for transplant patients. Not transporting stupid people to stupid shit they have stupidly planned.
Correct, as long as people can’t figure out a way to do so without accelerating the extinction crisis. Very obvious to anyone sane.
No. “The business” is just people. You have to gut the people to literally gut the business. And to proverbially gut the business would be to destroy it, reduce it to almost nothing - the euphemism you’re looking for is “under the rug,” not “gutted.”
I’m not even checking what claim, let alone checking for data to back it up. You have really proven you’re not worth much effort.
No, but I feel like you meant to ask if I would allege that, and you misspoke with “are you alleging” because you’re extremely bad at typing
Because of what? You being bad at typing? No, you don’t have to do that because of anything, and you being bad at typing doesn’t really make anyone do anything except struggle to read what you type
Because it was pretty eye-opening when I realized manipulation and gaslighting are the only reasons for the English language to use the word “law” as a bridge-synonym between “observable realities of nature” and “shit the authorities say”
How can you pretend this is a real question? I get that you’re just asking dumb questions to gaslight me, but like, doesn’t it only take 1 brain cell to figure out that banning the stuff from DNS/IP addresses drives people to use Tor for anonymity and not be public about this stuff? Are you entering new levels of acting brain damaged, as another layer of attempting to gaslight me?
Are you asking me for dictionary help again?
Again, you have to ask why abusers are protected by concealment?
I asked why you’d remove it from the internet, not why you wouldn’t go to websites with it
Another question even dumber than most of your extremely dumb questions so far.
Correct, but phrased with edgy wording I wouldn’t usually use.
Didn’t ask. The question at that part was, should it be you (or people like you) going through it to remove, or people who openly want to see it?
A huge proportion of westerners have travelled by plane, and will do so again.
How do you know they don’t need to be there in person?
Are you an anarcho-primitivist?
As in it guts access points for people to share it, to sell it, to discover it. That has impacts on the business.
Your claim that sites removing CSAM makes it harder to catch pedophiles.
Okay, so sometimes CSAM should be removed?
So you agree with some sites removing CSAM?
Not sure how this explanation relates to when you initially said: “reach a future where everyone’s positions are clarified”.
But your conclusion here implies that we shouldn’t ban or reducess access to anything ever, because people will just be drawn to TOR and watch it there.
People posting about CSAM online tend to conceal their tracks, you know. Removing it or not isn’t going to necessarily make any difference to the likelihood of them being caught.
But you don’t think any site should remove it. That’s my point.
I happen to think child porn should be banned everywhere online, as much as possible. I don’t think any site should exist where people share it without consequence.
Seems you disagree.
Didn’t ask. Why waste time typing that?
Because they’re too dumb to be needed on planes like the heart-transplant ones. They’re a little too dumb to be the best medjet pilot and way too dumb to be a healthcare professional. Can’t think of other possibilities where dumb people need jet engines.
Sure.
Didn’t ask. Why waste time typing that?
What about it? Did you ask if I had a source for that or something? That would be so dumb, but I can’t think of anything you could ask about it that would be smart, it’s just a simple self-explanatory statement that doesn’t really open up any questions
Why do you keep repeating questions I’ve already directly given you the answers to?
Didn’t ask. Why are you complaining to me about your own lack of intelligence?
I guess that is another argument against censorship, but worded so badly it’s borderline incorrect. I assume you meant something that made more sense and it’s just you being bad at typing again.
Correct.
Incorrect.
Maybe you should try making points that are true, instead of pretending other people have said the opposite of what they’ve said, especially in text discussions where everyone can just read what’s actually been said.
Didn’t ask. Why waste time typing that here?
Again, I didn’t ask. I know my own positions. Why waste time typing that here?
So presumably you can’t forgive most westerners.
You have no idea of why they might be on a plane. Hell, for all you know it’s visiting family across the world.
Not sure why you even care about much of this to begin with then.
That’s me explaining why cutting out pedophile sites reduces pedophile business opportunities. It is 100% related here.
I did. It’s not self-explanatory at all. It might feel intuitive, but you’re assuming that when these sites are shut down that data isn’t being sent to the authorities.
You haven’t really. You’re all over the place on this.
It’s incorrect? So we should censor or block access to some things but not all things that could be acquired, in theory, on TOR?
So whether or not you see it doesn’t mean you’re more likely to catch them.
Again: Baseless conjecture from you.
You literally just said here that it shouldn’t be removable.
I said: “So you outright openly pro people’s right to share child porn online.”
Your reply: “Correct, but phrased with edgy wording I wouldn’t usually use.”
Still not sure you know what “presumably” means.
Most Westerners are currently what I call Nazis, so forgiveness would be a long way away for them, but this is the first time I’ve said that in this thread, and I can’t remember the context you’re saying it came up in sooner.
I can guess based on their reply to me that it’s not worth it.
My mom kept ignoring me saying she shouldn’t pollute the AIR WE FUCKING BREATHE to visit her sister who was dying of cancer, and now she cries about it regularly.
I feel horrible for her. I wish there was a better outcome for her than having a son who knows more than her, while she refuses to listen, and hates herself for it.
I don’t currently have energy left, after thinking about that, to give a fuck what an online stranger who insults me for no reason is going through. Did you think I’d give a fuck? Was there a reason for you to think that? Do you think the fucking survival of the planet isn’t as high on my list of priorities as it should be?
I didn’t ask what you can imagine them doing, so why did you waste time typing that?
So you asked me about anarcho-primitivism while having no idea what it is? That would be an impressive level of stupidity if it wasn’t just an abnormal level of dishonesty instead.
But I didn’t ask, so why waste time typing it?
Nope, especially not at the part you inserted it in, where the topic was how you said the business is “gutted.”
Secret-keeping is a pretty well-known capability of three-letter agencies. How old are most people when they learn that? 3? 4 at the most, probably?
I don’t get what you mean. The data is taken away from me, so I can’t give authority to myself in that context. The people I’ve been calling “the authorities” are the people who take it down, of course they have it.
Incorrect, and willingly so, like so many of your other attempts to gaslight me.
You don’t know what “borderline incorrect” means? Or you like, need me to pick one?
Who’s “we?”
I am not helping you with shit like this, or letting you help me with it, in any direct way. “We” can work at a certain degree of separation until you learn a useful enough skill to compensate for being an abusive psycho
Incorrect. I cannot catch people I’m not aware of. I have some chance of catching people I’m aware of. That is a difference in likelihood.
Perhaps you had me confused with yourself, who are too abusive, selfish, and dishonest to even try being useful.
Incorrect. I have not been posting any baseless conjecture here.
Not clicking that, don’t remember what I was asking about. Want to explain with screenshots, or was it just another time-wasting thing that’s not actually important?
Correct, and weird place to end the comment. Seems like you were in the middle of explaining something, and then stopped.
I think I’m done now really. This is just utterly unhinged. I am reporting this for abuse, because it’s just insults for much of it.
I hope so.
A professional might be able to help you.
Didn’t ask.