This will be one of the Fediverse’s biggest obstacles.
Need to get this under control somehow or else in a few years, tech companies, banks, and regulators will decide a crackdown on the fediverse as a whole is needed.
A few years? I bet Threads is doing this right now to shut down every private instance and take the fediverse for themselves. They’ll argue they are the only one that can moderate the content due to their size/resources
Would some sort of loosely organized group of instance admins help to make this happen? Like the U.N. for the fediverse? Sounds like a structured communication system would fix this.
I’m afraid a blocklist won’t be enough. As anyone can just spin up an instance or move their existing one to a domain that isn’t in the blocklist yet, a centralized whitelist will be the safer solution.
That’s a paranoid view Websites, google, email wouldn’t be able to exist if it were the case. Sounds more like a contingency plan in case someone that does that does pop up.
I think they’re speaking from the point-of-view of an uneducated body of legislators and average people who will not understand this
It doesn’t matter what we know the nature of the fediverse to be – it matters how they perceive it, and uninformed people are perfect targets for this type of FUD
The fediverse is the name for services that use ActivityPub - a communication protocol. What you are saying is like saying “tech companies, banks and regulators need to crack down on http because there is CSAM on the web”.
It’s software that also serves as a method to distribute and access it. But ultimately, it doesn’t matter, the resulting pushback will be the same.
The conclusion of the study was basically that the biggest players should enter the fediverse in order to use their capabilities to scan and police it.
Wherever this shit exists, unwanted attention and scrutiny will follow, while the reputation of the platform will be harmed.
Did you read the actual study that this article refers to?
Going by your lack of further response, I’m going to assume you didn’t, otherwise you’d have noticed that you’re wrong. I recommend reading the sources of articles in the future before commenting on them.
The conclusion of the study was basically that the biggest players should enter the fediverse in order to use their capabilities to scan and police it.
Not sure if that would work as users are fleeing from those big players as they don’t prioritize the safety and needs of their users.
The contradictory problem is that current major corporations prioritize money at all costs even at the expense of their users so their customer base flee to the next best service/product provider.
People are currently abandoning Reddit and Twitter because their moderation system either doesn’t work or has underlying contradictions to what users are asking for.
Facebook launched Threads and people only joined initially due to FOMO. With how transparent they are in harvesting user data at the expense of people’s privacy I think (and hope) that people are starting to realize that this is probably not in their best interests.
I think what we’re seeing is evolutionary filtration of the web similar to natural ecosystems where the species with the highest ability to adapt that survives.
Based off of one metric it seems that companies structured around proprietary software (zero-sum systems) are unsustainable. This is my untested observation however so this could be true currently but systemically wrong once examined and tested.
So the idea that
biggest players should enter the fediverse in order to use their capabilities to scan and police it.
doesn’t seem to make the most logical sense as the foundation for those companies is untrustworthy and unsustainable.