Aspirational new vat structure for Goblins. https://gitlab.com/spritely/goblins/blob/master/goblins/vat.rkt
Does it work? Let's find out!
It's a great house, with a great @mlemweb, but I pretty much didn't step a foot outside of it after our friend left on Sunday
government based social network filtering in the US
More fodder for the GOP demanding it: https://www.thedailybeast.com/twitter-restores-mitch-mcconnell-campaign-account-after-gop-freakout
Had a dream that we were living a more normie life:
a) I literally had the classic "you have amnesia, you forgot what happened the last few years" trope
b) yet I was a few years younger
c) Morgan and I were both on more "stable" career paths
d) our house was less weird, more suburban
e) we had a kid whom I clearly loved and focused all our energy into rather than projects
It seemed like a perfectly acceptable life path and it was nice to visit it. I find the path I'm on good/worthwhile though.
Ultimately I argue that we need our systems to be robust enough to support real expansion of decentralization.
But if you can see content, and you help host it, there's some level of responsibility there. I believe that people should have the right to say just about anything in their own home, but when they're in my home, you can't say slurs and hang out here. I would knowingly take down illegal content, thus I'm not sure why I wouldn't knowingly take down unethical content.
Eventually, maybe everything is E2E; we host things, good and bad, we can't see, and our system is robust enough to support it and still protect users. And our system *must* be good enough where we don't assume a few overworked admins save the world. And OcapPub warns about the nation-state'ification of the fediverse through allow/deny lists, and I believe this to be a real threat.
(... cotd, one last time ...)
- Ultimately, I do agree that the future of moderation is user empowerment
- I feel a bit caught here because I *am* arguing that the direction Mastodon and etc are heading is going to shake the fediverse apart, but that's because I don't believe it's robust enough / accidentally results in centralization
- But we should realize we don't have the tools for this direction yet
- *I* would not choose to host content with hate speech in plain view
(... cotd, almost done ...)
- I don't actually think that the you-and-your-friends-crowdsource-identifying-what-is-bad approach will work; an architecture for that may actually be useful for responding to "fake news", but I don't know if it prevents abuse (it may even increase the ability to dogpile). I'm not sure about it. But I wouldn't have chosen it as a first line of defense as listed in that article.
(... cotd ...)