Highlighting the recent report of users and admins being unable to delete images, and how Trust & Safety tooling is currently lacking.

  • @Eyck_of_denesle@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    529 months ago

    You don’t understand how open source works. You are not entitled to any features. Let the devs go on their own pace. A lot of open source projects shut down because of similar reasons.

    • Emily (she/her)
      link
      fedilink
      English
      38
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Likewise, an open source project can totally die if they refuse to engage with the needs of the users. The lack of moderation and content management tools have been a longstanding criticism of Lemmy, and instances will migrate to alternatives that address these concerns. It is a genuine legal liability for instance operators if they are unable to sufficiently delete CSAM/illegal content or comply with EU regulations.

      • @Eyck_of_denesle@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        7
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        But opensource projects are more likely to get dropped by devs than losing their userbase from what I’ve seen. I could be wrong. Both our points are true. That’s the best part of fediverse. If one doesn’t like lemmy, they are free to choose an alternative. I just don’t agree with demanding features from open source developers. There is a distinct line between demanding and requesting. I’m not saying lemmy is perfect. Maybe Sublinks would be better. Let’s wait. But even Sublinks won’t be sustainable if users do not respect developers time and patience.

    • Sean TilleyOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      27
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      While I think you’re correct about it ultimately being their project, and that users are in no place to demand or expect anything, this thing takes on whole other dimensions once a project is all about building a social platform. Particularly one where volunteers host part of the network themselves.

      It’s one thing to look at some random demand to write everything in a P2P architecture because DNS is too centralized. When I worked on Diaspora, I literally saw people demand stuff like that, and laughed it off. I’m trying to build a platform that exists today, not some pixie dream bullshit compromised of academic circle-jerking.

      But when it comes to basic table stakes for participating in a network that already exists, things change a bit. This is especially true when you’re connecting to a global network that has:

      • Hate Speech
      • Targeted Harassment Campaigns
      • Child Pornography
      • Extreme Gore and Violence

      Suddenly, it makes a lot of sense to say “you know what, admins are going to want to filter this shit out, maybe it’s reasonable for them to have some tools and fixtures that are part of core.”

      Unfortunately, these devs are the kind of people who scream angrily when someone says “Hey, this thing doesn’t actually respect local image deletes / GDPR stuff / content deletion on account deletion”. To me, that’s fucking insane.

    • @masterspace@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      You don’t know how social networks work. They only survive based on network effects, if they don’t have the most basic functionality that users expect (like complying with privacy legislation), then they will fail to reach critical mass and be outcompeted and die.

      If the devs don’t want to provide the most basic functions that any user of a social network would expect, they’re welcome to be downvoted to hell and have their project go back to being one of the millions of forgotten and unviewed personal github projects.

      Open source projects die because it takes both technical talent and attention to your users to make a project successful, and for-profit companies often pay different people to do those.

      • @DrCake@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        14
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        The entire point of the “fediverse” is to combat the network effect. Don’t like Lemmy? Move to another app and still communicate with people on Lemmy. Plus it’s all open, can’t find an app you like? Build one or wait for someone to build one you like.

        • @masterspace@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          79 months ago

          The entire point of the “fediverse” is to combat the network effect.

          No, it’s not.

          The purpose of the fediverse is to decentralize control of the network, it does not eliminate network effects in any way shape or form. At the end of the day a social network is only as valuable as the users using it and contributing content to it. If they don’t find lemmy pleasant to use, they’re not going to say “let me jump to mastodon” they’re going to go to Reddit.

          Build one or wait for someone to build one you like.

          You really don’t understand network effects if you think you can just sit around and wait for basic functionality and expect your network not to die.

    • RubberDuck
      link
      fedilink
      English
      29 months ago

      We can expect them to follow the law. And yes this means implementing required features to comply with the law.

        • @maynarkh@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          49 months ago

          It does apply, but not to the Lemmy devs, but to the instance admins.

          As it stands, you can’t legally host a Lemmy server in either the EU or the US (or places they can reach) and federate with the 'verse at large without fear that the authorities will come after you.

          • @SupraMario@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -29 months ago

            This is not true at all, you can host a instance in the USA for free and not be subjective to the GDPR. You’re not selling anything, or marketing anything or doing any data collection to be sold. It %100 does not apply.

            • @maynarkh@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              19 months ago

              GDPR article 3, and the EU-US Data Protection Umbrella Agreement concluded in the US in December 2016 which makes it US law disagree.

                • @maynarkh@feddit.nl
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  1
                  edit-2
                  9 months ago

                  Lemmy instances offer services to me as an in-EU data subject, and that makes it subject under the very Article 3/2 (a) you linked.

                  the offering of goods or services, irrespective of whether a payment of the data subject is required, to such data subjects in the Union

                  Since there is federation, a US-based instance would still be a data processor if it IP blocked be as coming from the EU.

                  I did in fact read it.

                  • @SupraMario@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    19 months ago

                    Read the rest of it, instead of cherry picking shit. The instance needs to be collecting your data and selling it or making some sort of money off of it.