It was a good faith comment, I’m merely pointing out another tactic that the powers that be try to use to discredit people. I’m not comparing pedophilia allegations against being called a far right extremist. I’m just pointing out it’s a separate tactic.
I guess I wasn’t too clear on that, wasn’t expecting these sorts of replies.
Yep, the other go to is calling people right wing extremists.
I’m sure most are real, but am curious as to how many bots there are in the amount.
I’m thinking in terms of the future.They’ll have profit incentives to find ways acquire whatever data they can profit from. While they may not be able to do certain things now, companies like this chip away bit by bit in the long term.
With their incentives, resources, and prior behavior, I’m not certain what they can add would be worth whatever the positive result of their profit making activity.
Edits: spelling.
Meta and other big for profit players in social media have a bad history. Privacy, ads, profits at all cost. The people concerned about this early on are basing it off the previous behaviors of these companies.
I feel like it’s a good and early immune response.
Not everyone has strength of conviction he does. Companies look for the weak link, how can they buy off or stroke the ego of.
Adding some T&C’s in as OP suggested could be a good idea. Sure they can ignore it, but it’d be good to put in as many road blocks as possible to prevent the enshitification attacks that will eventually come in the distant future.
Wonder if Google, Apple, or SoC makera are asked or secretly mandated to leave certain backdoors in. I know mobile providers have quite a bit they can see on their end.
It’s a good thing we’re always presented with two choices for everything, like mobile OS’s, to control our choices like we’re toddlers.
Hopefully they leave the free features as is, and don’t starting going down the road many other companies have to squeeze out profit.
I guess I’ve been lucky enough not to be firehosed with it immediately. Guess I’ll come across it more as I subscribe to more communities.
Perhaps the various concensus theories and mechanisms that came out of crypto could somehow give inspiration on ideas to protect this service from the shitty financial actors that come in and ruin all of the good services.
I’m not saying actually using crypto, just maybe some of their concensus mechanisms/ideas for preventing bad actors could be put in place.
“Negativity on my feed is nonexistent.”
Absolute first thing I noticed when I came in to test this as a Reddit alternative. It’s so refreshing, and the discourse is so civil.
If there’s a way we can keep this quality, it’d be amazing. I often wondered when I’m on Reddit or twitter how much of the awful negativity is really people’s or bots/algos prodding them into acting this way.
If the current big players best bets are to weasel in on the large instances, are there any simple changes that could be done to prevent their take over or influence? Things that aren’t too heavy handed?
Are Email addresses kept and logged anywhere, or are they discarded after registration?
For privacy reasons, it’d be nice if we could somehow have a reliable bot blocking/spam blocking method that doesn’t require Email.
While Email adds a good layer of spam blocking just from the spam blocking the email providers are doing themselves, having an option to verify with Email OR jump through multiple hoops instead would be cool. Hoops that are difficult for a bot to be programmed to defeat all of them. Such as captcha, with a simple math equation, and something else all combined.
Just tossing ideas around, because this is all still being built out.
What are the typical actors in the Reddit and twitter spam scene? And what’s the likelihood of each type setting up on here now?
Product spamming, to advertise.
PR companies that offer to sway community opinions, upvote/down vote for their clients.
State actors with various propaganda intent.
Preparing the bot accounts early in order to sell them to PR companies or other actors above.
Actors incentivized to try to turn this service into a shit hole to keep users in the normal channels for some reason or other. Give it financial incentives or ability to control narratives on other platforms.
Bots push financial related news stories or sentiment, eg. Trying to pump crypto markets.
These are just ideas off of the top of my head of the type of bots or actors running them. But I don’t really have any experience with it, just wondering what everyone’s thinking the intent is.
Yes, I agree. My point was left v. Right or anything like that. I was just pointing out that it’s another label I’ve seen thrown out label I’ve seen thrown out there in the last few years when trying to discredit people.
I guess my point didn’t come off they way I meant it looking at all of these replies.