Indeed. The whole thing needs to be looked at. Someone somewhere decided that the topic was taboo and needed to be purged from the internet, and then someone somewhere decided that it was ok that the tpoic gets to see the light of day.
What about all those times internet infrastructure companies shut down the people who built their own website? Do you see the precedent that you're setting?
Once is enough because it sets a precedent. But AWS taking down Parler is an example, as is AWS taking down America's Frontline Doctors. You may not like those websites, but if it can happen to them, it can happen to anyone.
Honestly I think Mastodon is already about as easy to use as possible. The real problem is the network effect, and the fact that the average person really just doesn't care enough about the benefits you get from it.
What we really need is a libre, decentralized social network that's "cool" enough that non-tech people would have FOMO if they don't join. That's a much harder problem, one that I certainly won't be able to solve any time soon.
> Honestly I think Mastodon is already about as easy to use as possible. The real problem is the network effect, and the fact that the average person really just doesn't care enough about the benefits you get from it.
I care a great deal about the benefits of Mastodon! For me, the benefit is that anyone who is obsessive about conspiracy theories, racism, etc have a quarantined social space where they can converse without me having to listen.
Hahaha I agree with my sibling - I went on a ride with bitclout and enjoyed the camaraderie, but immediately saw how petty people were going to get over losing a buck, ironically ready to call other users scammers at the drop of a hat.
If they had a different answer to decentralization than a 2MB/minute block size or a media hosting solution that wasn’t just “allow iframes from YouTube and Vimeo” I would have had more faith, but now that I’ve cashed out I see what the sibling sees, target demographic for a influencer-speculation-exchange is very small.
Then we need to move our own digital "lives" onto those better platforms, and start encouraging our friends to join us.
For my part, I'm working on a new social app where everything is E2E encrypted [1], so you don't have to trust the server. The main use case is to let parents share photos of their kids in a safer way. I'm hoping this will be a big draw for people who have currently checked out of the creepy ad-tracking platforms.
It won't change anything. This isn't to do with facebook per-se, you'd just get "unlinked" from whatever arbitrators or aggreggators of a decentralized alternative exist, and still be labeled a social outcast and a conspiracy theorist. It's not a technology problem, rather it's one of imbeciles.
It also exists on HN. There is a bevvy of topics we are not allowed to discuss here because dang will point to some arbitrary guidelines saying how "that's not allowed here" and ban you. It's the same shit everywhere.
Basically, the moment you step outside of the given narrative and what is and isn't allowed to be questioned, you should have zero (or less than zero, actually) expectation of having a platform where you can voice your concerns, and heaven forbid that your online persona be linked with your personal details, because if it is, you are in so much deep shit it's not even worth it for most people to utter certain words.
I once posted a question about some trans issue on multiple online communities. I forget the exact issue, and I presented both sides of the issue and then where I thought the truth may lie. I was pretty open about not knowing and wanting a discussion. It got shutdown everywhere, so I live on in ignorance because some things are apparently verboten. How does that benefit anyone?
There should be nothing so sacred as to be above debate.
The problem with this group of tech companies deciding what is true and what is not, is that even if they're right the vast majority of the time, that few percent where they were wrong and silenced that voice actually matter. Nearly every idea we now hold sacred in science was once heretical. If you silence the heretics, how can you have progress? The Catholic church used to do that, during a period we now call the dark ages. We know how this ends.
Protecting people from misinformation can't be done with censorship, only by presenting them with the truth.
You realize the reason being that Facebook users jump from “virus was leaked from a lab in China” to beating up Chinese-looking people a bit too eagerly. This is why I’m not that much concerned about Facebook rules in this case.
Getting expelled from scientific community for not sticking to the most convenient hypothesis is another matter, much more serious.
There are plenty of more neutral and thoughtful comments taking the side of the lab leak theory that don't end up in a downvoted or flagged state. The GP comment obviously broke the site guidelines, for example with gratuitous flamebait.
It's all quite sinister.