flamingos-cant

An interactive tragedy.

  • 319 Posts
  • 787 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle


  • Let’s say tomorrow the feddit.uk team decides to self host a PDS provider.

    Is it possible for the feddit.uk team to ban someone, or can that only be done by Bluesky? Would that ban be federated to other PDS providers?

    We could stop hosting the account and purge it from our DB, though IRRC the user can migrate to a new host and have Bluesky populate that with their old data, because everything is public on AT and is kept in Bluesky’s relay (I think this is a bad thing, just fyi). The user would still be banned from the various labelers as these operate (I presume) on the accounts DID, which should stay the same across migration. PDS providers don’t talk to each other, PDS don’t do much so don’t really need to. They just store data.

    Edit: I feel like Bluesky has the same issue than the Fediverse has with federated bans and alts, but because everybody uses Bluesky’s centralized components, nobody notices.

    Bluesky does genuinely have some better moderation tools, labelers are something I think even us on Lemmy/PieFed/whatever might want to look at. But these aren’t magic and there’s plenty of toxicity on Bluesky, Bluesky just gives you some more tools to help manage it. When Mastodon gets the ability to disable replies I think will help a lot.



  • Bluesky’s network topology doesn’t work like APub’s, so this question doesn’t really make sense. Like, what is the ‘instance’ here? The relay? The users’ PDS? The AppView? I suppose the PDS provider could ban a user and this would then be indexed by the relay(s). We can argue all day about how decentralised the AT Protocol is, but Bluesky the platform makes no effort to be decentralised*.

    * By decentralised I mean a platform controlled by multiple independent actors, a multi-stakeholder platform. Even if you use a non-Bluesky the company relay + app view, it’s still centralised around whoever is hosting those.



  • Labour really went from repealing Section 28 to introducing a whole new one. How we’ve let this childish and anti-science notion that ‘biological sex’ is static become so pervasive is seriously depressing. Claiming someone’s ‘biological sex’ is only ever the same as the one they had at birth is like insisting an adult only weighs 4 KG.

    The Guardian in typical fashion quoted two trans hate groups who of course prefers the Tories even more anti-trans guidance.

    Then there’s this part, from section 68:

    Schools should ensure that they cover all the facts about sexual health, including STIs, in a way that is relevant for all pupils, including those who are lesbian, gay, bisexual and/or gender questioning.

    So a kid can’t be trans, only gender questioning. Thanks Labour, really committing to your manifesto pledge to 'protecting the freedom for people to explore their sexual orientation and gender identity".





  • We’re hosted in Germany, but that doesn’t actually matter as the admins are physically in the UK so Ofcom fines are actually a worry. I need to do another review (yay), but I’m pretty sure we don’t have to do any age verification. We do have to assume all our users are children though, as we can only say we don’t if we do ‘highly effective age verification’* of our users, and we do host content that is ‘likely to appeal to children’, but I don’t believe we host anything that would need to be gatekept from children. We actively block NSFW content and as far as I’m aware there isn’t a suicide encouragement or terrorist recruitment community on Lemmy. There are maybe some things that I may need to be changed/patch in Lemmy (e.g. letting users lock their own posts), or making some safety tools (one I want to work on is doing perceptual hashing of images embedded in markdown as current tools only work on post links), but I don’t think complying is necessary an issue for us. I’m not a lawyer though and that’s just my understanding, we could be fucked.

    * This entire ‘force every website to keep a separate database of users adult status’ is so stupid and I swear it only works like this because of lobbying from companies like Yoti. PornHub is right that it should be device based, but these laws are only using children as a crutch. It’s implemented like this because certain parts of the British establishment find porn icky and are hoping by making it more invasive to access that you’ll stop watching it. Of course, all this is going to do is push people to sites that don’t follow the law so host more extreme content.




  • flamingos-cant@feddit.ukMtoUK Politics@feddit.ukThe hubris of Britain's new left
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    No paywall

    The event was a success; there will be more like it in Ilford and around the country. Britain has become a multi-party system and there is an appetite for a party (or perhaps just candidates) that talks about peace, Palestine and poverty. The launch of Sultana’s new party has been messy and the left beyond Labour is fragmented, with some elements filtering into the Greens and some likely preferring the more decentralised independent model.

    This seems unfair to Sultana, her party announcement focused a lot on inequality (two child cap, winter fuel payment, PIP). I get the left spends a lot of time talking about Gaza (justifiably, because genocide), but I don’t think that necessarily means a left election campaign will focus this much on foreign policy.

    Zack Polanski’s Green party leadership bid is probably close to what a left campaign would (or at least should) look like.












  • It’s amazing that to gage if Corbyn supports Sultana’s party we have to read between the lines of an interview with ITV from a few days ago instead of Corbyn just stating he’s with the initiative.

    Either the reports are true, or this is a major comms failure on the yet-to-be-named party’s part. Having the initial talk of your new party being if the supposed co-founder is involved isn’t a good look. Corbyn has a lot to be rightfully mad at the media for, but this is one is on him.