Should the Fediverse welcome its new surveillance-capitalism overlords? Opinions differ!

The Nexus of Privacy@infosec.exchange to Fediverse@lemmy.ml – 17 points –

Should the Fediverse welcome its new surveillance-capitalism overlords? Opinions differ!

https://privacy.thenexus.today/should-the-fediverse-welcome-surveillance-capitalism/

Contents:

- Two views of the fediverse
- The case for "Trust but verify"
- Wait a second. Why should anybody trust Facebook, Instagram, or Meta?
- Why the Anti-Meta FediPact is good strategy
- We're here, we're queer, fuck Facebook
- A few words about digital colonialism
- Now's a good time for instance admins to discuss with their communities
- In chaos there is opportunity!

@fediverse@lemmy.ml @fediverse@kbin.social #fediverse #Meta #FediPact

31

You are viewing a single comment

@thenexusofprivacy @Kryostar @fediverse@lemmy.ml @fediverse@kbin.social

"Like I say, opinions differ"

Apparently. I prefer unbiased application of the server rules my instance advertises, as I based my decision to join it on those.

Other Mastodon users may prefer a certain bias, that's all right too.

@sibrosan The server rules on your server explicitly prohibit transphobia.

So why do you see enforcing the rules by not federating with another server that's got a long history of transphobia as "bias"?

@Kryostar @fediverse@lemmy.ml @fediverse@kbin.social

@thenexusofprivacy @Kryostar @fediverse@lemmy.ml @fediverse@kbin.social

> So why do you see enforcing the rules by not federating with another server that's got a long history of transphobia as "bias" <

IMO the rules should be enforced when they get broken, not preemptively due to an expectation they would.

No Meta server exists that uses ActivityPub, so if they set up one, it won't have a "long history of transphobia".

And when that server turns out to not behave, it can be defederated quickly enough.