I’ve been trying Lemmy for a little while and wasn’t sure how to feel about it.
Today, I wanted to start blocking the most high-censorship instances until I could find a fully zero-censorship instance and simply block all the ones with censorship. Filter bots, not people.
When I looked into it further, I found out there are no zero-censorship instances, because Lemmy relies on a broken “federation” system where each instance is supposed to be able to fetch posts from other instances, but it’s never been finished to reach a fully working state. Lemmy’s official docs say you can’t even do federation over Tor at all. This means it uses DNS, so it won’t actually allow Lemmy instances to fetch posts from each other freely, it just gets blocked instantly and easily, every time the authorities feel like blocking anything.
So you can only ever have the “average joe lemmy” and “average joe reddit” with everything approved by the authorities, and then “tor copies of lemmy” and “tor copies of reddit” where you have free speech but you can only reach other nerds.
People seem to think Lemmy is different because this weird censorship fetish is extremely popular and most of you are happy to see bans happen to certain people, not just bots, so a small Lemmy that censors certain people feels fundamentally different from a big reddit that censors more people. But it’s the exact same thing, it’s reddit.
When reddit was smaller, you could say basically anything you wanted there, they just wouldn’t let it reach the main audience. Then it got too big, and any tiny part of the audience you could reach would be too big, so they won’t let you talk at all.
Lemmy is now the small part of reddit where you can say whatever you want, separated from the main audience, until too much growth happens and you have to move again.
It’s not actually a solution to reddit. It’s not designed to be different, it’s designed to match the past today and then match reddit’s present tomorrow, while being part of a system that’s about the same in past, present, and future.
Last year, this year, and next year, you’re posting somewhere it won’t be seen by many people, and the system that charges people for ambulance rides is getting another year of ambulance ride revenue, facing no organized resistance. There’s no difference here.
Lemmy urgently needs federation between onion service instances and DNS addresses in order to actually do what most users seem to wish it would do: allow discussion outside what the corporate authorities allow, while outgrowing reddit & helping undo the damage social media has done to human communication.
That is an insane position. You can look it up and you shouldn’t even need to. Why is your default stance that it’s not true and you won’t look it up, placing the burden of proof on me? Why would I look it up for you in response to that? It’s not like what I’ve said is some wild hard to believe shit where you could think I’m trying to embarrass you or waste your time looking it up.
I am not claiming that any particular individual is issuing orders to individual Lemmy instance admins.
I am also not claiming that there is a “US government,” or that any Lemmy instance has particular “owners.”
Why do you ask?
No, why?
OK. Why do you bring it up though?
But I didn’t ask if you think it’s a good thing. I’m tired of hearing about people paying for ambulance rides and not organizing any resistance. I want communication infrastructure. I’ve noticed a fundamental systemic problem with Lemmy. I know that problem exists because people like you think of it as a good thing. I addressed that in my main post. It seems like there is no point to your reply except to bother me out of hostility.
That’s how the burden of proof works. You make a claim, you provide proof.
You just made the claim that “you make a claim, you provide proof” is how burden of proof works, and didn’t provide proof for it. You refuted yourself.
You also said “that’s”, where “that” was supposed to be my comment you were replying to, but my comment didn’t say that. I never said “burden of proof is a term for how every statement should always be backed up by proof.” My comment was about how you tried to shift burden of proof onto me in an insane context.
The fact that your core statement is a refutation of itself should make me laugh, but the vote scores reveal I’m surrounded by mentally ill bullies here, and a few minutes on Google can reveal we still have the atmospheric lead and maskless COVID spread that you all probably got this brain damage from (I say with not necessarily any burden of proof because, like other things we’ve discussed, you are free to Google it), so this just scares me.
You should just get banned.
BREAKING: Fake commie threatens real commie with violence on the internet (this has never happened across all internet discussions)
If getting banned is violence, then sure.
Ah, I see you edited your other comment so it no longer tries to equate banning with violence. Being manipulative in a Lemmy thread must feel badass when you have 62 IQ
Maybe not after all
You made the claims. You back it up. Where is your evidence that Lemmy instance owners are appointed by the government?
You alleged the US government appointed lemmy instances owners.
So they don’t answer to the US government. You should try to understand more about the instances on here you seek to chastise.
Because you keep bringing it up. You are essentially complaining about two separate things in your OP, one current - and one hypothetical.
No, you have noticed that instances have their own terms of service and you don’t like that, and that hypothetically Lemmy instances could be shut down by government bodies in the future due to the system. Two separate things.
This seems non-sequitur. How does this answer, actually answer? What am I missing? (Nothing, you’re just doing a gish gallop of nonsense, and it was non-sequitur as it seemed)
No. I have been clear, repeatedly, the US does not exactly have a “government” and Lemmy instances do not exactly have “owners.” Stop gaslighting and trying to confuse people.
What do you mean, and again, how is it an answer?
Where did I ever once bring up what I asked why you were bringing up at this part? And what was it again? I forgot
Incorrect. I have noticed, and don’t like, that instances with their own terms of service can’t federate. Why are you acting like you can’t read?
Incorrect. As I have been repeatedly saying this whole time, the impact is today, not in the future. There are already Lemmy instances being blocked from federating today. Government bodies would never contribute to this for any reason I can imagine.
The two things you made up are separate, but why?
Lemny instances absolutely do have their own owners. And any instance can federate with who they like, but that doesn’t mean the instance on the other side has to accept it.
Are you implying that no instance should be allowed to reject incoming federation attempts?
They can’t really have “their own owners” without Tor. They’re relying on DNS / IP addresses, which are (successfully) designed to collectivize all ownership of all addresses within them. Tor’s onion addresses are the ones designed for individualized ownership.
Then change the documentation to explain how, instead of having the docs suggest it can’t be done.
No, are you inferring that somehow?
They still own the actual instance that exists on their local servers. If they are meddled with, they’re meddled with but this is a hypothetical currently. They certainly “own” their server more than I do or you do.
What? What docs suggest it can’t be done?
So what’s your issue then? If lemmy.nazi set up shop tomorrow, every single instance would block them and they could be unable to federate because no-one would want to federate with them. What now?
Forgot to reply to half of this at first, my bad
https://join-lemmy.org/docs/administration/tor_hidden_service.html
That would be pretty embarrassing for them and the Lemmy devs because Lemmy has no Tor federation, which makes lemmy.nazi an idiot project for trying to exist, and makes Lemmy an idiot project for baiting people to use it to try to make things it doesn’t work for
That’s just TOR, not federation.
How would they be “baiting” them exactly? I don’t recall where the Lemmy devs explicitly advertised it like that.
On desktop, use “ctrl+f”
On mobile, find the “search in page” feature for your browser
Then type “federation”
Or, to find it more easily: try reading the second paragraph of the link
Odd. People keep telling me Lemmy advertises itself as a place where everyone can start their own communities with “self-hosted” instances that combine using “federation”
How?
How? Do I need to yet again repeat how this isn’t true, because you missed it, or are you just leaving out another half of the paragraph where you support your statements and connect your counter-argument to the context?
I don’t know who you are. I probably own most servers more than most people based on how much influence I’ve been allowed to exert so far without being killed. Not sure. Wouldn’t even be a topic to discuss though, if Lemmy used Tor, where instead of complex collective human webs of “ownership,” you just straight up have a guy with a thing that’s his that no one else has so he “owns” it
It’s backed up at home, presumably.
You have provided no example of any regulatory body or government meddling with interfering with the operation of any Lemmy instance.
That’s maybe absolute individual ownership of a backup, nothing like absolute individual ownership of a Lemmy instance.
You have provided no reason I should provide an example, despite repeatedly suggesting I should, and repeatedly being asked why.
I’ll ask another thing this time: what do you find when you just look it up? Does that not work?