Conversation
Notices
-
Michael Collins (cyberczar)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 18:12:00 CET Michael Collins Maybe this explains it better: *Nobody has the right to an audience.* /cc !gnusocial - mcscx and Nicolas Maia like this.
-
saul st john (betafive)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 18:35:45 CET saul st john @orobouros of course instance admins have the right to do what they like with their individual instances. should !gnusocial, though, facilitate widespread censorship? -
Michael Collins (cyberczar)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 18:48:47 CET Michael Collins Absolutely. An admin must have full and complete control over what happens on his or her server. Full stop.
The day some outside entity forces me to do something on my server against my will is the moment I turn it off. (I would assume the same applies to most other admins.) !gnusocial -
saul st john (betafive)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 18:51:22 CET saul st john @cyberczar no one's talking about forcing admins to do anything-- we're talking about whether additional development to !gnusocial in order to support some admin's desire for enhanced censorship functionality is warranted and appropriate -
Bob Jonkman (bobjonkman2)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 19:03:43 CET Bob Jonkman !GNUsocial is !FreeSoftware. If the current contributors don't bake in the ability to block users/groups/tags/instances then someone else will fork the code and do it. And as long as it stays Free Software someone else can fork that code and remove it again. mcscx likes this.mmn repeated this. -
التنينوكس (dragnucs)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 19:06:48 CET التنينوكس @ericxdu23 way do you need to over complicate. Why not just let users override global node blocks and allow nodes or users globally blocked. mcscx likes this. -
lnxw48 (Linux Walt) (lnxw48)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 19:22:22 CET lnxw48 (Linux Walt) @cyberczar @betafive @orobouros @bobjonkman2 @dragnucs I'm pretty sure there is some instance-blocking functionality already in !Gnusocial. Back when Evan's company was the primary host of !StatusNet, some spammer instances arose that started randomly mentioning people by their full #webfinger addresses. After a short time, this stopped happening. That tells me that the spammers' instances were blocked. -
التنينوكس (dragnucs)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 19:23:29 CET التنينوكس @lnxw48 @bobjonkman2 @cyberczar @orobouros @betafive Can't you just block a node in the OS via the firewall or a similar method? -
lnxw48 (Linux Walt) (lnxw48)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 19:25:10 CET lnxw48 (Linux Walt) That said, overuse of that functionality could turn GS from a growing, unified network into a small number of shrinking and mutually-opposed networks. I would hope that admins would seriously consider the impact before they block instances. Christel T. likes this.Christel T. repeated this. -
lnxw48 (Linux Walt) (lnxw48)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 19:30:42 CET lnxw48 (Linux Walt) Yes. -
Hiker (hikerus)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 19:50:28 CET Hiker @bobjonkman2 You mixing up different things. Free Software is a technical expression and has nothing to do with ethical decisions of admins to block users because they violate the TOS they accepted when they registered the account. So there it is really not necessary to fork the code. @betafive -
mmn (mmn)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 20:25:31 CET mmn @lnxw48 #XMPP servers generally already support blocking other nodes by domain name. It's maybe more sensitive in a public environment like this, but rather than "opposing networks" (in a way that's correct though) I think end-users will be encouraged to have multiple accounts in various sub-fediverses :) -
Bob Jonkman (bobjonkman2)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 20:54:17 CET Bob Jonkman @hikerus The point of my !FreeSoftware message is that applying a technical means to enforce a moral standard will not work. If an admin objects to offensive content in the timeline they can write "censorship code" to keep it out. If someone objects to "censorship code" in the software, they can just remove it, and run their instance without it. Censorship will happen, whether our code contains censorship code or not. Offensive content will exist, whether our code contains censorship code or not. So, the moral argument about whether our current !GNUsocial codebase should contain such censorship code is moot. But I think it is better that such code is written by the current developers, the better for seamless integration. mmn likes this. -
Hiker (hikerus)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 21:04:29 CET Hiker @bobjonkman2 That's the wrong way round: Every user accepts the TOS when he/she subscriber to the account. And if he/she doesn't follow this TOS an admin has to ban such an subscriber. That as nothing to do with "censorship" - this is how a user acts on the service. mcscx2old is still alive (famous last words) likes this. -
mmn (mmn)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 21:23:40 CET mmn @hikerus I think you should probably read what @bobjonkman2 writes again, perhaps try to think of it from a different perspective. He's not actually saying anything that opposes your statements. -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 21:53:27 CET simsa01 @cyberczar No. & if only b/c providing infrastructure doesn't make it "their" node. A node is created by all contributions of all users. -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 21:55:03 CET simsa01 @martin It won't. It's "concerned" admins who will decide that. @cyberczar -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 21:56:54 CET simsa01 @vinzv Wait when users of your node start replying to it, thus lifting content from /main/all to /main/public. Will you then censor them? Christel T. likes this. -
oldsimsa0account (oldsimsa0account)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 22:01:31 CET oldsimsa0account @cyberczar Then switch it off. When a user of yours replies to something in your /main/all it will occur in your /main/public @betafive -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 22:07:00 CET simsa01 @martin Twitter still seems to me far more tolerant to dissenting opinions than the majority of smut concerned GS node admins. -
Hiker (hikerus)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 22:10:52 CET Hiker @simsa01 Do you have some examples for "dissenting opinions"? @martin -
vinzv (vinzv)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 22:11:06 CET vinzv @simsa01 No, I won't show content from the foreign nodes that don't comply with German law. -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 22:17:31 CET simsa01 @martin Won't be of much help, as subscribers on other nodes might be prevented to receive my posts, making federation pointless. > -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 22:18:50 CET simsa01 @martin > In fact, the way ppl (mostly admins) in the fediverse try to accomodate to those problems is why I returned to Twitter. -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 22:22:12 CET simsa01 @vinzv Which is to say that not only federation breaks down but that standard retort "then look for a node that suits you better" is flawed. -
Hiker (hikerus)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 22:24:27 CET Hiker @orobouros No, it's not. It's violation of a contract and it was clearly noted in the TOS. -
vinzv (vinzv)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 22:29:55 CET vinzv @simsa01 Yeah, sure, federation breaks down if notices are not shown in /main/all. Furthermore the sky will fall on all of us and we're all gonna die.
I won't discuss this thing anymore. Laws force me to do so and my personal opinion stands with this law. Adult content has to be accessible for everyone but I won't advertise it. I don't want to risk losing users just because of some dick pics on the start page.mmn likes this. -
vinzv (vinzv)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 22:30:31 CET vinzv @martin @simsa01 No as they're all federating and always will. -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 22:30:41 CET simsa01 @martin We both choose the censorship we want to live w/ -- me on Twitter, you in the Fediverse, where admins, not user decide what is ok. -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 22:36:29 CET simsa01 @vinzv Are you sure that something nasty pubilshed on a foreign country node under its laws can be a legal issue in Germany? Has anyone > -
Hiker (hikerus)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 22:36:31 CET Hiker @simsa01 Just now I never saw a list with reasons why users had been banned from an instance - besides racism and sexism and harassment of other users. Can you help so we can discuss the reality - not a phantom? @martin -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 22:37:21 CET simsa01 @vinzv > actually inquired into such legal issues of federation? -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 22:43:18 CET simsa01 @martin They don't censor b/c of legal troubles, but b/c they don't like the content. -
Hiker (hikerus)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 22:49:07 CET Hiker @richardkrafftebing My definition is here https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexismus @simsa01 @martin -
vinzv (vinzv)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 23:00:48 CET vinzv @simsa01 Simple thing: the federation techniques store it as a local copy on a server under German jurisdiction. And even if that aspect is left out: I open up access with no check of legal age which is a risk of lawyer's letters I want to avoid. Benedikt Geißler likes this. -
vinzv (vinzv)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 23:01:15 CET vinzv @martin I don't get it either. -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 23:11:45 CET simsa01 @vinzv That's what I assumed. & that's why Nazi, child porn, etc.are strawmen in this discussion, not issues -- they have 2 be taken down > -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 23:12:57 CET simsa01 @vinzv > due to national laws. But compare this w/ application of at times differing publishing licenses of nodes in the fedverse. Which > -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 23:14:31 CET simsa01 @vinzv > one does prevail? AFAIK (after inquiry at CC in S.F.) the original license is the 1 that travels w/the post throughout federating > -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 23:16:31 CET simsa01 @vinzv > (except when dual licensing is explicitly permitted).Same could be case w/ *content* of posts--their legal status travels w/ them. -
Hiker (hikerus)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 23:19:13 CET Hiker @simsa01 Your list about examples of banned people and the reasons is still missing. @vinzv -
vinzv (vinzv)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 23:22:58 CET vinzv @simsa01 No, that asumption is way too theoretical and will not work. There is a file (a copy of a file from somewhere) on a server in Germany, ran by a German company and administrated by some German guy. Guess who will be held responsible for the file. majestyx and Benedikt Geißler like this. -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 23:29:58 CET simsa01 @vinzv Your answer may be too general.See http://qttr.at/16q0 (case from 2004), in which a internet auction house > -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 23:30:16 CET simsa01 @vinzv > could not be held responsible for false info on auctioned items. -
vinzv (vinzv)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 23:34:32 CET vinzv @simsa01 Might be, that's a theoretical case. The thing is: I neither have the money nor have the time to fight in court for some sort of strange "free speech" issue caused by porn pics. So the best way to avoid that is to hide it *from start page* (!!!). No blocking, no censorship, just not letting it get through to public on the systems I'm responsible for. That's all. Benedikt Geißler likes this. -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 23:37:15 CET simsa01 @vinzv Then you never should have started a node. Because, as you seem to imply, *you* are always responsible for what is federated to > -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 23:39:08 CET simsa01 @vinzv > your database & you can't spend whole day monitoring what people post. Then federation was a legally dangerous thing in 1st place. -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 23:41:01 CET simsa01 @vinzv OTOH, even if you hide it from the startpage -- as soon as your users reply to a nasty remote post, it appears in /main/public. -
vinzv (vinzv)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 23:43:24 CET vinzv @simsa01 That's what I want to be fixed. Replies are okay, remote posts will get pulled in but not shown. -
vinzv (vinzv)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 23:44:41 CET vinzv @simsa01 As soon as I get aware of problematic content, I'm trying to fix that. Which is okay for German laws. But for nodes spilling problematic content on and on I will have to fix it somehow permanently. -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 23:48:58 CET simsa01 @vinzv But they keep being in your database, right? -
vinzv (vinzv)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 23:50:20 CET vinzv @simsa01 Sure. Where it's not accessible by the public, only by users. Problem solved. -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 23:50:22 CET simsa01 @vinzv Yes, and that's why the usal retort "Move to some other node if you don't like it here" is so utter rubbish in this debate. > -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 23:51:01 CET simsa01 @vinzv > (People here keep confusing issues of freedom w/ issues of federration.) -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Sunday, 28-Feb-2016 23:53:04 CET simsa01 @vinzv So the users are allowed, in your country, 2 access illegal / problematic content, but not the user who happens to stop by your site? -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Monday, 29-Feb-2016 00:10:40 CET simsa01 @x0x7 And how does that answer the questions about what to do w/ "problematic" posts that federate across the globe? @vinzv -
vinzv (vinzv)'s status on Monday, 29-Feb-2016 00:14:23 CET vinzv @simsa01 Yes. That for the ToS have to be expanded with s.th. like "be aware that there can be adult content around". -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Monday, 29-Feb-2016 00:16:30 CET simsa01 @vinzv Hmm, interesting. *thinking* -
vinzv (vinzv)'s status on Monday, 29-Feb-2016 00:18:01 CET vinzv @simsa01 Think of it similar to FSK18 landing pages where one has to state his age and/or to tick a box to accept the risk of seeing nudity etc. -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Monday, 29-Feb-2016 00:22:04 CET simsa01 @vinzv So then let every node have an "adult content" tag. Child porn will be taken down due to national laws, the rest is unproblematic. -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Monday, 29-Feb-2016 00:23:43 CET simsa01 @vinzv To be clear: Germany's law demand that smut, though permissble for subscribers, may not be shown on the site's general audience page? -
vinzv (vinzv)'s status on Monday, 29-Feb-2016 00:30:40 CET vinzv @simsa01 Exactly. -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Monday, 29-Feb-2016 00:31:58 CET simsa01 @vinzv IS this true for other countires as well. And where can I read more about that? (Thx for your effort.) -
Benedikt Geißler (benediktg)'s status on Monday, 29-Feb-2016 00:33:35 CET Benedikt Geißler @mangeurdenuage No one is prohibited to say anything he/she wants by the proposed measures because he/she can simply open up an own instance and be his own master afterwards. "Free speech" does not mean that everyone has to hear/read it by the way. @cyberczar @vinzv vinzv likes this. -
vinzv (vinzv)'s status on Monday, 29-Feb-2016 00:35:00 CET vinzv @simsa01 I think so, but I never looked in too deep. German laws on porn are very relaxed. In contrast to that see e.g. the UK where they started blocking porn on home routers some years ago. I guess a good starting point to read is this article: https://gnusocial.de/url/2721052 -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Monday, 29-Feb-2016 00:37:01 CET simsa01 @vinzv But there is no consensus of how to understand those things w/ the admins of the many nodes of the fediverse? -
vinzv (vinzv)'s status on Monday, 29-Feb-2016 00:38:56 CET vinzv @simsa01 No, not at all. Many points rose only due to the past wave(s) of new users. I guess there just was no need to talk about earlier. Benedikt Geißler likes this. -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Monday, 29-Feb-2016 00:51:01 CET simsa01 @vinzv 1/n Thought so. But that means that the whole debate is primarily about safety issues for admins. (Which I wholeheartedly support). > -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Monday, 29-Feb-2016 00:51:24 CET simsa01 @vinzv 2/n > But then to say "You can go someplace else w/o losing contact, or you can self-host" is an evasion, as it is primarily about > -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Monday, 29-Feb-2016 00:51:50 CET simsa01 @vinzv 3/n > moving possible legal hassle from one admin to somebody else, best to the one having issues w/ the policies of the admin. And > -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Monday, 29-Feb-2016 00:52:18 CET simsa01 @vinzv n/n > under cover of this, some admins try to impose what kind of content they want on "their" node. Eek. -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Monday, 29-Feb-2016 00:53:10 CET simsa01 @vinzv [And w/ this I leave things be for tonight. Thank you very much for your patience and endurance, esp. as you're fed up w/ that topic] vinzv likes this. -
vinzv (vinzv)'s status on Monday, 29-Feb-2016 00:53:27 CET vinzv @simsa01 Don't spread my opinion on all other admins. I'm sure others have a very different view on that issue. -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Monday, 29-Feb-2016 00:56:42 CET simsa01 @vinzv I won't. But your explanations have been a real eye opener for me. Thank you, again, for that. -
vinzv (vinzv)'s status on Monday, 29-Feb-2016 01:05:41 CET vinzv @simsa01 Sure thing, you're welcome. -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Monday, 29-Feb-2016 01:22:43 CET simsa01 @derkatzenhund Is this true for your own country as well? (Assuming yoiu're not posting from Germany.) [Thank you for taking your time.] -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Monday, 29-Feb-2016 01:24:16 CET simsa01 @derkatzenhund Ah, you do post from Germany ;-) Well, do you know a bit about this re: the legal situation in other countries? -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Monday, 29-Feb-2016 02:05:11 CET simsa01 @derkatzenhund Of course you can't ;-) Thx anyway. I just decided to collect info about this, as it seems vital 2 the whole censorhip debate -
Peter D (derkatzenhund)'s status on Monday, 29-Feb-2016 03:29:44 CET Peter D @simsa01 The legal situation and the more or less subtile differences even between countries which in general provide freedom of speech and freedom from censorship is for sure an important aspect to it. The other thing is that people often do not understand that having free speech in general does not imply that everyone is obliged to grant it to them on their premises. The main advantage of such a decentralized system is that there is not a single entity to decide that you are out because (no) reasons and that's it. Sure, if you sit on your own instance constantly publishing e.g. nazi propaganda (assuming it's legal where you are) more or less the whole network may decide against including you but your instance is still there and accessible trough the public space which is the internet. This is why I think the censorship debate is a bit pointless. Nevertheless I agree with how @vinzv handles this and in general consider it good practice to not block users from interacting with other instances. Benedikt Geißler repeated this. -
simsa01 (simsa01)'s status on Monday, 29-Feb-2016 03:52:07 CET simsa01 @derkatzenhund [In order not to litter your TL w/ multiple posts, a screenshot w/ my answer.] http://qttr.at/16qk