Comment by jchw
2 years ago
Honestly, something here doesn't quite sit right with me.
From the article:
> No single company can get online safety right for every country, culture, and community in the world.
From this post:
> There are also "infrastructure takedowns" for illegal content and network abuse, which we execute at the services layer (ie the relay).
If there's really no point in running relays other than to keep the network online, and running relays is expensive and hard work that can't really be funded by individuals, then it seems like most likely there will be one relay forever. If that turns out to be true, then it seems like we really are stuck with one set of views on morality and legality. This is hardly a theoretical concern when it comes to the Japanese users flooding Bluesky largely out of dissatisfaction with Twitter's moderation of 'obscene' artworks.
Before the Elon event (and maybe again now), Pawoo was by far the most active Mastodon instance, and there's an almost complete partition between ‘Western’ and ‘Eastern’ Mastodon networks.
Yeah, this issue continues to cause a lot of strife across the Fediverse. Misskey.io and mstdn.jp are both extremely popular (presumably only second to Mastodon.social) and obviously these Japanese sites follow Japanese law and norms with regards to obscenity.
I certainly am not saying that server operators should feel obliged to content they do not like, especially if they believe it is illegal or immoral. After all, a huge draw of the Fediverse is the fact that you get to choose, right? Sure, personally I think all obscenity law is weapons-grade bullshit regardless of how despicable the subject matter may be, but also, server operators shouldn't feel pressure to compromise their ideals, attract a crowd of people they simply don't like, or (of course) run the risk of breaking the law in their jurisdiction, so what happens on the Fediverse seems like it is the right way for things to go, even if it is harmful to the federation in the short term.
But that's kind of the double-edged sword. You either have centralization where someone decrees "the ultimate line" or you don't. With Bluesky, there's a possibility that it will wind up being decentralized properly, but it could wind up being defacto centralized even if they uphold their promises and I think that strongly devalues the benefits of decentralization where they count most. Today, there is in fact one company that holds the line, and it's unclear if that's going to meaningfully change.
There are some aspects of AT proto and Bluesky that I think are extremely cool: an example is identity, identity in AT proto is MUCH better than it is in ActivityPub right now. However I'm not surprised they are not going to acknowledge this problem. Just know that they are 100% aware of it, and my opinion is that they really do want to find an answer that won't piss everyone off, but they also probably want to avoid the perception that Bluesky is a haven for degenerates, especially early on when there are less network effects and they desperately need to appear "better" than what is already out there. Unfortunately, I can only conclude that their strategy is most likely the best one for the future of their network, but it still rubs me the wrong way.
If Japanese users aren't willing to run their own relay I don't think we can blame Bluesky for that. Ultimately decentralization devolves some level of responsibility onto users.
3 replies →