Somehow, I feel like the federated network is still centralized, because there is still censorship; it’s just distributed across more servers.
I mean, it definitely gives users more rights to free speech, and I’m not worried about privacy issues. However, the removal of content and the banning of accounts are things that are diminishing my passion for sharing my thoughts publicly(on reddit).
I just dont want this happened on here but I am seeing some…
You must log in or register to comment.
I can’t help but feel that you’re conflating censorship with centralization. A defederated network just means that the servers you’re on will choose what they’d like to censor. Running your own server or looking for one which you probably agree with is something which may work for you, while giving others the ability to defederate and not have to read what you’re saying.
Censorship is also decentralised which means no single entity will be able to completely control the information, but that doesn’t mean you can do whatever you want without consequence of all the decentralised instances agreeing that particular information should not be shared. Decentralisation does not guarantee you an audience!
If you start your own server, you moderate yourself.
Whether others want to federate with your server is up to them.
You can absolutely have free speech, but nobody is forced to actually listen to you.
Which is good, because in the real world, every place that has “zero censorship” rapidly devolves into a Nazi invested shithole.
Ya, I agree with you that no one is forced to actually listen to me, but removing content… I mean, I was spending a lot of time writing those and looking for replies, but they just remove it before anyone sees it… That sucks.
No one is required to host your content, spread your voice, give you a platform. You really need to stop using the term “freedom of speech” here. It means something totally different. Publisher won’t print your book? “Censorship!” This is what you sound like.
They’re afraid of my raw power!
I am😂
Okay okay, stop being so angry about it man, you know I am talking about ‘censorship’ when I say ‘fos’
They’re literally saying it’s not censorship. If a publisher doesn’t publish your book, is it censorship? No. Folks aren’t forced to host your content if they don’t want to.
Exactly, thank you. It’s neither an infringement of free speech nor censorship. None of us has any entitlement to amplification here. We participate by the good graces of the mods and admins.
(I think this dude is 14 and still thinking of everything as black and white, and also everything being about him)
What did you post that got removed?
But other people who are on my server might think the same way as I mentioned
You should have spent time reading the rules of your server before spending time with writing your content. It doesn’t matter if others care or not. Someone has a wall and is letting you write on it. It’s their wall, not yours. They can make their own rules. You are free to have your own wall.
Well it’s yours so you get to decide. Go make your own platform and you can have all the freedom you want. But it always seems to be that folks want a share of someone else’s platform, and when they can’t get it, their freedom has been taken away. SMH
You don’t need to allow other people on your server.
Its decentralized nature isn’t due to censorship, or a lack of it, but its structure. Of course there’s going to be some degree of censorship because instances all have individual rules which, if you break, you’ll be penalized for which can take the form of removal of content.
The only way to have total free speech is create your own instance which is a total free for all but then you’ll attract the worst sort of people and your instance will end up defederated by instance owners who don’t want content from literal Nazis federated to their instances.
That second paragraph highlights exactly how the Fediverse works. If you’re a shitty friend, no one will want to be friends with you.
Start your own instance and community. Post whatever the hell you like.
Then other instances choose whether to defederate. They federate by default.
There is no single point of control (centralisation) which decides what is seen on all instances.
Your right to choose is the same as everybody else’s right to choose. You can decide to post something, and others can decide they don’t want to see it. Decentralized just means there is no one entity to make those decisions for you.
However, the removal of content and the banning of accounts are things that are diminishing my passion for sharing my thoughts publicly(on reddit).
I just dont want this happened on here but I am seeing some…
Those post/comment removal and user banning are for a good reason. For every one innocent content removed there’s a large amount of harmful content removed as well.
yeah this seems like a self tell…
what is it they want to say that’s getting them banned?
I’ve literally never been banned off a platform before.
Federation and “censorship” aren’t mutually exclusive?
The great thing about this system though is that you can always create an account on your own instance, and interact with any instance that hasn’t been defederated from you.
I am not quite understand it, can you maybe explain a bit? Thx
You can create your own Lemmy or Kbin server just for you and post whatever you want. Whether other servers federate with you is another matter of course.
The Fediverse gives you absolute freedom of speech and everyone else absolute freedom to block you.
They can ban your account from a particular instance, but you always move to or create a new one.
I see, kind of like Nostr, right? But what about all the history, like messages and communities, that I was following from the other account?
Poof, gone.
ic, better to behave than
Why would this even be a consideration? Why is your default to misbehave? It’s attitudes like this that gives rise to moderation and censorship, because you can’t self moderate or behave without someone forcing you to.
You’re mixing up words and definitions.
It’s not about freedom of speech (or by some peoples interpretation it would be more accurately called ‘anarchy of speech’). The need for moderation still exists just as the rights higher in the hierarchy of human rights still exist and need protection - especially from armchair anarchists.
Hey now, anarchists don’t deserve this slander. Moderation typically falls under freedom of association/disassociation, which we’re strongly in favor of. The people you have a problem with are the ones that think you should be forced to listen to them, which is pretty contrary to the anarchist ethos.
I’m just wondering what you are sharing that is getting you censored off of most of the major instances. Something illegal? Something morally reprehensible that most regular people take objection to it? Like I understand Beehaw being very uptight about what they allow (to the point of defederating most major instances) but world just seems free for all but the most extreme views, ml will allow straight up genocide and warcrime denial as long as it’s China or Russia, and shitjustworks seems to be gamers in general, left or right.
Like there are instances that are just basically unmoderated free speech zones if that’s what you’re looking for. There are even instances that are echochambers for your political leanings if that’s what you are actually looking for. But most of the major instances are going to be catering for a more general userbase. Afterall, part of the reason world became the biggest is because it’s the one most former redditors were pointed to.
And the reality is, and part of the reason I’m apprehensive about Meta joining the fediverse, is because even in a decentralized environment, communities, opinions, topics and activity all becomes centralized around whichever community is the biggest. The internet itself is a decentralized network, but since everyone gathers in the same places, it ultimately became centralized around sites like reddit, insta, youtube, and twitter. That’s one of the reasons we are encouraged as fedi users to join smaller instances. Not just to save on space and traffic, but to encourage the activity in our local communities to grow.
Thx for explaining these to me bro, your point about the defederation of some instances is important, as it highlights the diversity and autonomy within the network, even though it might cause some fragmentation. And indeed, while every instance is privately operated, the option to host one’s own instance provides individuals with the freedom to set their own rules.
while you have the ability to say what you want, in this you do not get to force others to read it. Make your own space, or find one that you like. It will be an echo chamber, but like I said no one is obligated to read what you post about.
I think “polycentric” is a better term than “decentralized.”
Every instance is a center, and is vulnerable to failure and corruption like any service provider. But at least we have a choice of instances, and there isn’t a single point of failure for the whole network.
I mean, they’re practically interchangeable words. They mean fairly the same thing. Polycentric is decentralized. You can use that word if it works for you, but decentralized is still correct.
Then what would you call a network where specific data isn’t tied to specific nodes and lost when the node goes down?
You are describing a decentralized system. But you aren’t describing a required function of decentralization.
I think that might be a little too macro for newcomers to understand.
macro?
I don’t think you quite understand what ‘decentralized’ means. Decentralization means there’s no central server, implying no data collection, no restrictions or moderation, and no banning.
Furthermore, it won’t corrupt when a single node breaks down. This is because a decentralized network is essentially built by all users within the network. Whenever one user quits or a node breaks down, there are always other nodes/users available to maintain the network. That’s the essence of a decentralized network.
Implying no data collection, no restrictions or moderation, and no banning
That is absolutely incorrect. All of those things can and do exist but it is dependent on each instance. There isn’t a single entity controlling those things, each fediverse instance decides for themselves. One instance could collect everything you do, restrict what you post, moderate what users post and comment, and ban users as they please.
Decentralisation doesn’t mean “no rules”
I just said that lemmy is not a decentralized network…
But it literally is.
deleted by creator
Why do you think so ?
Because it’s polycentric. Each instance is a center. When an instance goes down, it takes all its users and data with it.
I know people around here aren’t fond of cryptocurrency, but bitcoin is what I’d consider a truly decentralized system. Nothing is lost to the network when a bitcoin node goes down. As long as you have your private key, you can spend from any node, and you don’t even need a node to receive.
I believe it’s helpful to distinguish between the two types of systems.
Thanks for explaining 😊
Thanks for asking. :) Have a good one.
A federated network is inherently decentralized, because the network can continue to operate in a diminished state after a node goes dark. Your local government and electric grid are decentralized.
I think you’re mixing up “Decentralized” with “Distributed.” A distributed network operates at full capacity as long as at least one node has (the majority of) the network’s content.
gitandtorrentare distributed.Well, as long as a distinction is made. I appreciate the information. I still feel that “decentralized” should be replaced with “polycentric,” but I’ll accept that “decentralized” is the standard term for a system with multiple centers.
Lmao, I missed the ‘term’ word, I thought you said is better than decentralized, sry bro
The great thing about this system though is that you can always create an account on your own instance, and interact with any instance that hasn’t been defederated from you.
