Skip to main content

I think everyone needs to be aware of this: https://fed.brid.gy/r/https://snarfed.org/2024-02-12_52106 and think about whether and how they want their #fediverse accounts to interact with #Bluesky.

Admins should probably discuss with their communities whether or not they want their instances opted-in by default. I think it's unfortunate that he built it to be opt-out rather than opt-in, but Ryan does, at least, seem open to working toward mutually agreeable solutions.

#fediverse #bluesky
in reply to L. Rhodes

L. Rhodes
L. Rhodes
• •
I expect this: https://snarfed.org/2024-01-21_moderate-people-not-code will be making the rounds, and while it sounds nice, I think one big factor it leaves out is that code is deployed by people. Sometimes, what looks like moderating code is actually moderating people based on their decisions (like how they've structured relations on their protocol) and past behavior (like how they handled events in Myanmar). Focusing on code rather than who's behind it can obscure the fact that there's good reason to withhold your trust.

Moderate people, not code

Dixit / Marie Cardouat The scope of the fediverse has been hotly debated recently. Are we a big fedi? Or a small fedi? Are instances just nodes? Or networked communities? Which Camp of Mastodon are…
snarfed.org
in reply to L. Rhodes

L. Rhodes
L. Rhodes
• •
For example: #Bluesky doesn't pass posts directly from server to server. They all go through indexing servers that are so costly that only corporations (like Bluesky) or governments are likely to run them. Companies can recoup those operating costs using the same sort of Big Data business model some of us left Twitter over. Governments might run one just to keep tabs on their citizens. Moderating code can be a way of moderating the people who are built into the basic operation of that code.
#bluesky
This entry was edited (2 months ago)
in reply to L. Rhodes

L. Rhodes
L. Rhodes
• •
I think most of us who came from #Twitter were at least vaguely aware when we were on Twitter that our posts there were being being analyzed and monetized. For many of us, moving to the fediverse WAS opting out. Building bridging services to be opt-out rather than opt-in leaves us with a greater deal of uncertainty than we had in that situation, and leaves us dependent on the reach of accounts with ~400 followers to let us even know there's something to opt-out from.
#twitter
in reply to L. Rhodes

L. Rhodes
L. Rhodes
• •

Dammit, now I've worked myself up.

MAKE YOUR BRIDGING SERVICES OPT-IN BY DEFAULT. I don't care if it makes your service less useful. Making it opt-out by default undermines the usefulness of the fediverse for the people for whom coming here was, itself, a form of opting-out, and making that decision on their behalf is presumptuous.

⇧