this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2023
351 points (98.6% liked)
Asklemmy
43786 readers
1195 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I view them embracing federation as a good thing.
I also view it as important for the instances I wish to follow to never federate with them.
But is it even possible for a mega corporation to embrace federation? Isn't that essentially a contradiction in terms?
It's the kind of embrace a boa constrictor wants to have with a rabbit. The answer always needs to be no.
Exactly. Absolutely anyone can set up an instance.
Want your own Instagram type system? Roll out a Pixelfed server. Want your own Lemmy.
The #Fediverse is big. Very big. Probably up into tens of thousands of servers. No company could take it over, which is by design.
Google runs gmail, which like all email service providers is basically federated with all other email service providers. Hasn't stopped smaller email providers from continuing to chug along just fine.
To be clear, though, that's a best case scenario. It's definitely possible Meta could try to warp the Fediverse so that it kills all instances other than their own. We'll have to be vigilant and proactive to make sure that doesn't happen here.
This is my primary concern; if smaller instances say "we will block them on sight and anyone who federates with them as traitors" then it's a matter of getting the largest instances to go along with it and suddenly you've blocked a large chunk of users due to the fracture of smaller ones trying to defederate their way out of the problem and into a different issue.
I think @JakeBacon has a reasonable take, there are some upsides, and some downsides. I don't think there is anything that is gained by pre-emptively doing anything though. If they run their own instance, see what it does and then decide accordingly.
Can you personally block content from specified instances, for your own user? That would do it for me just fine.
Yeah as a user you can block a person or a domain, which was the intended first step, not pre-emptive defederating.
I thought the domain block was the domain of linked content? There's other reasons I would want to individuall block instances: for example, those which are primarily languages I do not speak. Nothing against the content, it just isn't useful to me.