When the barrier to entry is technical in nature you get a selection of the competent in that space as your representation. It’s not perfect, but it beats zuck, musk and Huffman.
Attempting solidarity pragmatically.
I don’t believe in imaginary property.
When the barrier to entry is technical in nature you get a selection of the competent in that space as your representation. It’s not perfect, but it beats zuck, musk and Huffman.
If we didn’t live in a universe of an obviously (over)reactionary electorate this might be the ideal.
The problem is consensus building takes time, as long as political wins are narrow you’re reinforcing the outage cycle.
Understandable, and yet if nobody contributes upvotes out of the same concern you end up with nothing standing out in your feed to come comment on. Kind of circular.
On the other hand having an upvote actually attached to your (and I actually mean your handle here) name would likely give it credibility in a weird sense. There’s much less incentive to blindly upvote if it essentially shows what you saw like a slug trail, but if you’re selectively giving oxygen to the best of what you see then that trail is valuable to others who value you. It’s a functional change from competing to push things for their own sake.
Im old! I come from an era where there was no such thing as OPSEC as soon as you interact with another party you cant personally name. For every consumer that was the phone company, or literally right out the door. If you transmit (login credentials, personal info, search queries) the expectation is somewhere, someone or something is logging it. Not even maliciously all the time either, sometimes I got to some of this out of boredom. The corporate Internet just kind of acts like a middle man, because that same problem never went away, just siloed into companies.
Until we get to a future like Transmetropolitan where the expectation is your online presence has some dirty laundry (and hopefully leave out the other stuff), all the bits/bytes, not just upvotes, you transmit should have a limited expectation of privacy. This is just the best/latest reminder because every hack is the same problem, only the company has incentive to keep it quiet so it doesn’t hit their bottom line.
This is super interesting to me.
I think you’re right in that the user base has the same expectations despite a huge change in the model. But it’s going to be the same on any server, your circle of trust now has to include your instance owner everywhere on the fediverse.
In general there’s no expectation you can delete every email you ever sent either, just your local copies. Most of what you see here is similar with some new attached protocols (votes, markdown etc)
I’m sure we’ll see some evolution, but the entire infrastructure is a call back to when a single service wasn’t directly linked to a single business, and it shouldn’t be treated like one.
In other words I’m not sure the concession isn’t the price you pay to not have reddit/twitter in charge. Because any other architecture that had the convenience of having a single point to delete from is also going to be a single point of failure.
Fully expected to be buried since I’m late to the party.
That’s really only half of it, there is no real erasure possible when everyone’s holding a cached copy. Personally… I kind of like it, I don’t hold any value to the words I contribute here as long as they’re for everyone.
But everything and everyone is living in concentric glass houses here.
It’s a very interesting thought, but it will always struggle to account for variables you can’t see.
It’s always going to be designed top down to approximate your own development as human from the ground up. I don’t douby AI as a feasible possibility, but I don’t think we’re headed for digital clones. They’re always going to have some amount of the creators ghost or assumptions in the machine.