this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2023
40 points (93.5% liked)
Lemmy.World Announcements
28383 readers
3 users here now
This Community is intended for posts about the Lemmy.world server by the admins.
Follow us for server news ๐
Outages ๐ฅ
https://status.lemmy.world
For support with issues at Lemmy.world, go to the Lemmy.world Support community.
Support e-mail
Any support requests are best sent to [email protected] e-mail.
Report contact
- DM https://lemmy.world/u/lwreport
- Email [email protected] (PGP Supported)
Donations ๐
If you would like to make a donation to support the cost of running this platform, please do so at the following donation URLs.
If you can, please use / switch to Ko-Fi, it has the lowest fees for us
Join the team
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
What I would honestly fear happening more than corpos coming in to buy up communities is the possibility of them join forces to lobby congress or other governmental authorities into creating unfavorable legislation and regulation.
It is nice to be in a free world, but freedom is a threat to those that want to make money off of peoples' attention.
this is why its important to eventually move the instance to the edge, its cool to do federation at this level now but there is too much liability for everyone longterm to have these chokepoints. If everyone is running the software themselves and we are all just sending encrypted messages to eachother over the internet it becomes very difficult to stop. This is one of the advantages P2P has over federation. However you do get a perf hit doing this. We need a middle ground.
Definitely. P2P is the way to go, but has its costs. It would be really good to see a semi-federated/P2P hybrid or some other architecture that allows some of the best of both worlds.
Is this what element does? You go through the encryption ceremony with someone in a DM, it prob still goes through the server but there is no reason that it could not go to P2P mode once the certificate exchange has completed.
I will honestly have to look into it more. It seemed interesting, but I have not done a deep dive into how it works.
ive been on it for about 2 years but only use it a little bit, ill be firing up a server for my instance this week. you can do even stronger encryption and run bots to your hearts content with your own server.
What do you use it for?
end-to-end encrypted chat rooms mainly. always been a supporter of federated systems, though was not sure if these were going to catch.
its essentially fediverse's version of discord with better privacy options.
But you still either have to have each person ship their posts to everyone who wants to see them, direct, or else you have someone out there gasp operating a social media service without a license. And who knows who could be 12 and in Utah.
people need to learn to PKI, i can't be assed to figure everything out for people, its not like its not all published out there. you want to be the unbiased processor, get to deploying. you are on the wrong network btw.
Like what they've been doing with tiktok? I'm unsure what spin they could try to make to convince it to be banned. That lemmy is made by the commie far left???? If they tried to do so they'd just bring more users out curiosity anyway. Zoomers have a penchant for doing the exact opposite of what right wing law makers tell them to out of pure spite, it's kinda funny.
So, what I would guess is that they would take a similar tack to other decentralized services or FOSS initiatives. You find people that are using the technology to skirt an existing law, for instance sharing pirated media, circumventing encryption, or some other thing that shouldn't be a crime, but technically is. Then, you demonize the whole technology for that one set of infractions. Make an attempt to ban the whole the technology, but then walk it back to just a set of regulations that make it almost impossible to comply.
They could just host it offshore then and if it comes to it people who truly wanted to access it could just use a VPN. They'd be shooting themselves in the foot by causing awareness of the public about it as well. It's really hard for a government to "ban" an app or service online unless they'd plan on setting up great firewall-esque system, and not only is that extremely expensive but its very imperfect and glitchy due to the nature of the internet as a whole. I know even then people say "oh they'll just ban vpns then" it goes back to the same thing above. Like, they can make it kind of harder to access but they aren't fully "banning" it no matter how hard they try to and I think the general population here would fully be capable of finding ways around such restrictions.
It is a bit more complicated than that, but ultimately you are right. I am not really afraid of a ban but rather the soft legislation that simply disincentivizes it. Throwing cold water on a project before it is even off the ground is enough to kill something without ever coming out against it entirely.