this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2023
109 points (95.8% liked)

Lemmy.ca's Main Community

2820 readers
1 users here now

Welcome to lemmy.ca's c/main!

Since everyone on lemmy.ca gets subscribed here, this is the place to chat about the goings on at lemmy.ca, support-type items, suggestions, etc.

Announcements can be found at https://lemmy.ca/c/meta

For support related to this instance, use https://lemmy.ca/c/lemmy_ca_support

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I've been talking to many people about the controversy with Reddit, why I left it and why I went onto Lemmy, Kbin and Mastadon instead. Some of my friends have commented that the control is still a problem as other platforms and it is all dependent on who owns the software, who owns the hardware, who are the admins, who are the moderators and which community or group has the most influence.

Who are these people that influence the most control on the fediverse? Are they Conservative? Are they Liberal? Are they Republican? Are they Democrat? Do they lean to the left of politics? to the right? or are they center? Are they even political? But also if they had to be would they easily or not so easily influenced?

So .. for the ELI5 version of the question ... Who owns the fediverse?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Hardware: I personally own/operate my own instance, so I own the hardware. In case of just signing up for random instances, they own/operate the hardware or rent the hardware. This does bring up a lot of possibilities, so if you are concerned about such things consider running one for yourself/friends.

Software: The software is open source under the AGPL license, so it's free to use. It is copyright the original author(s) or organization that wrote it, who control which license is used.

Protocol: The protocol specification is ActivityPub which is separate of fediverse projects and a W3C specification. This means it's as safe as HTTP or other common web protocols in terms of ownership.

As for censorship, each instance can choose to block other instances they deem are inappropriate. So the system relies on each community making decisions about what is acceptable and isn't acceptable. There will be servers that have more fringe content, and these will likely have the least number of federated instances due to other users not wanting to participate in this content.

Ideally, the users of each instance will agree with the policies that instance has. If not, they can move to another instance that more closely aligns with their preferences. It's also important to respect the policies of other instances, as they are choosing to allow instances to communicate with their user base. If they see an instance as a threat to their instance, it's only natural to take action. Where this line is drawn is based on the instance admin and by extension the instance users. This will lead to a less connected network as a whole, but allows groups to exist without fear of being removed for their personal preferences. This is of course ignoring legal requirements, which will be a concern for most instance operators.

As for politics, large politically active groups will most likely have many instances that align with their politics. Once things get political, they can get murky fairly quick. Any instance admin could push their politics onto the instance, it's up to the users to decide if that is ok or not. The only way this would lead to censorship/control is in the case of centralization, where a small group of entities (or single entity) run the largest instances. This is the reason the fediverse is pushing back against Meta trying to join the fediverse in my opinion. It's up to the user base to strive for a decentralized system, and all the tools to do so are public and free (as in speech, it does have an economic cost). It's easier to just "join an instance", but with convenience comes a cost.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

As I mentioned in my other replies on this thread ... I think it is important for anyone of us to know who the owners and operators are of the instance we use. It not only protects us users but it also keeps those owners and operators accountable to what they created and maintain.

The logic works the other way too ... users should understand that these services require funds and money in order to operate ... we can't just expect tech specialists and hobbyists and technology enthusiasts to just work for free .. they have to pay for hardware, they have to pay for rentals, they have to pay for services and most importantly they should be paid something for all their time, effort and expertise.

Nothing comes for free ... and when we take for granted all these free services and free work that are being done by anonymous people, eventually they will get tired of working so hard and they will drift towards a position of looking for money and in seeing monetary value to all the work they created, and then sell it to a corporation that can take advantage of it.

Which is why I find it important to know who the owners of my instance is ... and if I like them, I may want to send some funds their way to help support the work they do.

[–] xiao 3 points 1 year ago

Perfect answer 👍