Twitter likely to take idiots offer to buy them for $43 billion

[Copernicus]

That isn't my understanding. Mastodon publishes strict content and behavioral guidelines.

For example, child pornography is strictly forbidden. If a server owner does not comply with the requirement by removing violations, they can and should be kicked off of Mastodon.

Where did you get this information about central content and behavioural guidelines? I can't see anything about servers/nodes being kicked off Mastodon from the wikipedia page or Mastodon's website.

[I fixed the original--Loren]
(I fixed you BBCode error in this reply, but your original post still misattributes your post content to me in the above text. It is too late for you to fix it because of the editing timeout in IIDB.) Bear in mind that Mastodon GMBH is a German company, which must comply with EU laws. It is true that the Mastodon approach is a "federated server model", which ultimately leaves control in the hands of individual servers. Mastodon GMBH has never tried to enforce moderation standards on the "fediverse", but I know of no instances where they have ever needed to. The incentives for a server to avoid what they call "defederation" (basically, massive ostracism by other servers) are quite strong and explained in some detail in this article:

See:

What is Mastodon? A Social Media Expert Explains How the ‘Federated’ Network Works and Why it Won’t be a New Twitter​

Basically, server admins in the fediverse need to comply with their country's laws, so they become liable for not shunning noncompliant servers. A server that loses access to most of the fediverse will likely become quickly depopulated, since users can easily switch to other servers with full fediverse access.

See also Mastodon's

Moderation actions​

Moderation of content is distributed to local servers, but those servers are all centrally linked with each other such that users on local servers can see posts hosted on other servers.

Yes, but servers have servers/nodes have blacklists of other servers/nodes, and somebody who uses a server that blocks other servers will not see the content on that other server.

Wikipedia says:

Administrators of servers can block other servers from interacting with their own, an action called "defederation". Administrators and users rely on the "#fediblock" hashtag to alert others to troublesome servers, serving as a decentralized immune system for the network.

Now obviously all servers would have to comply with law (presumably of the country the server is hosting in), but I cannot see anything saying Mastodon itself (the non-profit that developed the network) has a central content moderation policy or control over who starts servers/nodes.

Actually, Mastodon technically has the ability to deny any server the right to use its logo brand, so that does give them a measure of direct control. It is possible that the EU could come down on them for allowing what it regards as refusing to police criminal activity in connection with their sponsorship of the federated server community. I doubt that that will ever happen, since the principal benefit to joining a Mastodon server is access to the fediverse, which, as pointed out in the above article, comes with strong incentives to moderate content.

 

[Metaphor]

Bear in mind that Mastodon GMBH is a German company, which must comply with EU laws. It is true that the Mastodon approach is a "federated server model", which ultimately leaves control in the hands of individual servers. Mastodon GMBH has never tried to enforce moderation standards on the "fediverse", but I know of no instances where they have ever needed to.

That's my point though. Mastodon GMBH does not ban servers or individual users. The servers decide their own rules and what other servers they'll block, but they can't take the other servers offline by appealing to Mastodon GMBH.

Basically, server admins in the fediverse need to comply with their country's laws, so they become liable for not shunning noncompliant servers. A server that loses access to most of the fediverse will likely become quickly depopulated, since users can easily switch the other servers with full fediverse access.

Servers need to comply, presumably, with the laws of the country the server is hosting in, but they don't need to comply with the laws of other countries. Holocaust denial is illegal in Germany, but I assume Mastodon GMBH has not banned a server or user for denying the Holocaust.

Actually, Mastodon technically has the ability to deny any server the right to use its logo brand, so that does give them a measure of direct control. It is possible that the EU could come down on them for allowing what it regards as refusing to police criminal activity in connection with their sponsorship of the federated server community. I doubt that that will ever happen, since the principal benefit to joining a Mastodon server is access to the fediverse, which, as pointed out in the above article, comes with strong incentives to moderate content.

Yes, but the server moderates content, not Mastodon. This is my point. Mastodon GMBH does not set central moderation rules for its 'fediverse', or interefere with what a server's rules are, or how a server decides to police its own content.

 

[Copernicus]

Metaphor, there is still some mechanism in principle that would allow Mastodon to "suspend" a Mastodon server, but I don't think it has ever tried or needed to do that. Don't forget that each server has to register with them.

Although you are technically right that Mastodon per se does not enforce any guidelines, they do provide rather extensive moderation infrastructure and a reminder that each server admin needs to set up content policies. Admins can easily learn what the policies on other servers are and get feedback. The federated server model has actually been criticized by some users as being much more restrictive than platforms like Twitter or Facebook. The incentive is to attract and keep members registered on one's server, so a rogue server that refuses to go along with what the majority is doing can quickly and easily become marginalized to the point where it just isn't realistic to keep it on life support. If a server admin sees another server allowing illegal activity being allowed on its site, they can be held liable for not blocking the miscreants on that site or even the entire site location.

 

[Metaphor]

Metaphor, there is still some mechanism in principle that would allow Mastodon to "suspend" a Mastodon server, but I don't think it has ever tried or needed to do that. Don't forget that each server has to register with them.

Although you are technically right that Mastodon per se does not enforce any guidelines, they do provide rather extensive moderation infrastructure and a reminder that each server admin needs to set up content policies. Admins can easily learn what the policies on other servers are and get feedback. The federated server model has actually been criticized by some users as being much more restrictive than platforms like Twitter or Facebook. The incentive is to attract and keep members registered on one's server, so a rogue server that refuses to go along with what the majority is doing can quickly and easily become marginalized to the point where it just isn't realistic to keep it on life support.

Following several links, I came across the Mastodon Server Covenant which, in its first rule, says:

All Mastodon servers we link to from our server picker commit to the following:​

1. Active moderation against racism, sexism, homophobia and transphobia​

   Users must have the confidence that they are joining a safe space, free from white supremacy, anti-semitism and transphobia of other platforms.

It isn't clear to me if that means Mastodon GMBH does indeed reject from its network any server not taking that pledge, or that it simply does not advertise those servers on its 'servers' page. If it's the former, then Mastodon is clearly going to be as restrictive and central-authority as Twitter was. If it's the latter, what you've written is that 'defederation' is enough to kill any servers allowing such content.

If a server admin sees another server allowing illegal activity being allowed on its site, they can be held liable for not blocking the miscreants on that site or even the entire site location.

Sorry, the pronouns above make the above sentence ambiguous for me. Is the above:

If a server A admin sees another server B allowing illegal activity being allowed (illegal in A's country or B's country?) on B's site, A can be held liable for not blocking the miscreants on that site or even the entire site location on A's server.

 

[Copernicus]

Metaphor, there is still some mechanism in principle that would allow Mastodon to "suspend" a Mastodon server, but I don't think it has ever tried or needed to do that. Don't forget that each server has to register with them.

Although you are technically right that Mastodon per se does not enforce any guidelines, they do provide rather extensive moderation infrastructure and a reminder that each server admin needs to set up content policies. Admins can easily learn what the policies on other servers are and get feedback. The federated server model has actually been criticized by some users as being much more restrictive than platforms like Twitter or Facebook. The incentive is to attract and keep members registered on one's server, so a rogue server that refuses to go along with what the majority is doing can quickly and easily become marginalized to the point where it just isn't realistic to keep it on life support.

Following several links, I came across the Mastodon Server Covenant which, in its first rule, says:

All Mastodon servers we link to from our server picker commit to the following:​

1. Active moderation against racism, sexism, homophobia and transphobia​

   Users must have the confidence that they are joining a safe space, free from white supremacy, anti-semitism and transphobia of other platforms.

It isn't clear to me if that means Mastodon GMBH does indeed reject from its network any server not taking that pledge, or that it simply does not advertise those servers on its 'servers' page. If it's the former, then Mastodon is clearly going to be as restrictive and central-authority as Twitter was. If it's the latter, what you've written is that 'defederation' is enough to kill any servers allowing such content.

It sounds like they retain the option to reject, but I don't think they've yet found a need to exercise that option. Since the software is open source, it is probably possible for a server to set up a new fediverse outside of the Mastodon fediverse, but a lot would depend on the open source license, I suppose. Germany has some nasty antisemitic organizations that might try to set up a server, but I have no idea whether any have tried.

If a server admin sees another server allowing illegal activity being allowed on its site, they can be held liable for not blocking the miscreants on that site or even the entire site location.

Sorry, the pronouns above make the above sentence ambiguous for me. Is the above:

If a server A admin sees another server B allowing illegal activity being allowed (illegal in A's country or B's country?) on B's site, A can be held liable for not blocking the miscreants on that site or even the entire site location on A's server.

For example, servers in the EU would need to comply with the new EU requirements for content moderation that will apply in 2023. Mastodon admins have the power to block noncompliant servers, so they could be held liable for failing to do that. Similarly, Mastodon servers in Russia could be held liable for violating that country's legal restrictions on political speech, but I don't think it would have much impact on the Mastodon fediverse. Russian citizens don't need to join servers hosted in Russia, but they run the risk of getting caught, if they have a lot of traffic with a foreign server. It would be foolish to do so.

We seem to be drifting off-topic with this deep dive into Mastodon moderation issues. The only thing making it relevant to the thread is that Musk seems to be afraid of letting Twitter users post links to Mastodon sites, even though they can post links to other social media sites. Mastodon has experienced a surge in growth because of his highhanded behavior on Twitter.

 

[zorq]

Last night some jerk posted Musk's "assassination coordinates" and attached a provocative image of an explosion but oddly didn't get banned.

Show

 

[Metaphor]

Last night some jerk posted Musk's "assassination coordinates" and attached a provocative image of an explosion but oddly didn't get banned.

Show

View attachment 41486

I'm pretty sure you are allowed to doxx yourself if you want to. I would also feel fairly safe revealing I was currently surrounded by 100,000 people.

 

[zorq]

Last night some jerk posted Musk's "assassination coordinates" and attached a provocative image of an explosion but oddly didn't get banned.

Show

View attachment 41486

I'm pretty sure you are allowed to doxx yourself if you want to. I would also feel fairly safe revealing I was currently surrounded by 100,000 people.

"Any account doxxing real time location info of anyone will be suspended, as it is a physical safety violation." -- Elon Musk.

Musk is a clown and certainly not a software engineer. Let's all go print out our code so he can look over it. Lol.

 

[Jayjay]

The downside of banning parody accounts is that now Musk has to provide all the parody himself:

 

[Metaphor]

Last night some jerk posted Musk's "assassination coordinates" and attached a provocative image of an explosion but oddly didn't get banned.

Show

View attachment 41486

I'm pretty sure you are allowed to doxx yourself if you want to. I would also feel fairly safe revealing I was currently surrounded by 100,000 people.

"Any account doxxing real time location info of anyone will be suspended, as it is a physical safety violation." -- Elon Musk.

Musk is a clown and certainly not a software engineer. Let's all go print out our code so he can look over it. Lol.

I'm sorry, but people post real time selfies all the time and nobody understands it as doxxing. To pretend it is is to let your hateboner for Musk override any sense of reason.

 

[zorq]

I'm sorry, but people post real time selfies all the time and nobody understands it as doxxing. To pretend it is is to let your hateboner for Musk override any sense of reason.

You think I'm laughing at Musk because I hate him? No. I'm laughing at him because, as I just said, he is a clown. That you refuse to see the obvious comedic juxtaposition between what he says and what he does speaks more about your emotional attachment to him (or perhaps just your intelligence) than it speaks to my emotional attachment to him.

Obvious hypocrites are funny. Whether by carelessness or malice, it doesn't matter. This isn't a new form of humor either. This is almost the entire comedic basis for the classic story "The Emperor's New Clothes." It boggles my mind that I have to explain this to you.

 

[Metaphor]

I'm sorry, but people post real time selfies all the time and nobody understands it as doxxing. To pretend it is is to let your hateboner for Musk override any sense of reason.

You think I'm laughing at Musk because I hate him? No. I'm laughing at him because, as I just said, he is a clown. That you refuse to see the obvious comedic juxtaposition between what he says and what he does speaks more about your emotional attachment to him (or perhaps just your intelligence) than it speaks to my emotional attachment to him.

Obvious hypocrites are funny.

But it isn't hypocrisy, obvious or otherwise. Posting information about yourself is not doxxing.

Whether by carelessness or malice, it doesn't matter. This isn't a new form of humor either. This is almost the entire comedic basis for the classic story "The Emperor's New Clothes." It boggles my mind that I have to explain this to you.

You haven't explained anything. Posting information about yourself is not doxxing.

What is Doxing?​

Doxing (sometimes written as Doxxing) is the act of revealing identifying information about someone online, such as their real name, home address, workplace, phone, financial, and other personal information. That information is then circulated to the public — without the victim's permission.

 

[zorq]

OMG! But posting someone's real time location is really just posting their assassination coordinates! How can you justify the public publishing of Musk's ASSASSINATION COORDINATES???!!!

 

[Metaphor]

OMG! But posting someone's real time location is really just posting their assassination coordinates! How can you justify the public publishing of Musk's ASSASSINATION COORDINATES???!!!

Because it was with their permission.

This isn't hard, zorq.

 

[zorq]

OMG! But posting someone's real time location is really just posting their assassination coordinates! How can you justify the public publishing of Musk's ASSASSINATION COORDINATES???!!!

Because it was with their permission.

This isn't hard, zorq.

Lol, your convenient definition for doxx isn't universal. Most are more generic. It is perfectly acceptable in the modern vernacular to doxx oneself. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/doxx#English But here we are with you splitting hairs authoritatively about a word that is still considered to be slang.

 

[Patooka]

What is Doxing?

Doxing (sometimes written as Doxxing) is the act of revealing identifying information about someone online, such as their real name, home address, workplace, phone, financial, and other personal information. That information is then circulated to the public — without the victim's permission.

So basically what Elon Musk did when he posted the number plate of a complete stranger and pretty much everything Libs of Tik Tok has done. Got it.

In further developments from this brave warrior of free speech:

Twitter bans linking to rival social media websites, including Facebook, Instagram and Mastodon

Twitter's new owner Elon Musk makes another move to crack down on certain speech, after he shut down a Twitter account last week that was tracking the flights of his private jet.

www.abc.net.au

This is why I say fuck free speech. Conservatives have hijacked its original meaning and use it nowadays to mean "I want to be a bigoted cunt and be free of consequences".

EDIT: Yikes

Musk promises to stand down as Twitter head - if users vote for it

www.9news.com.au

Elon Musk has pledged to step down as head of Twitter if the results of an online poll on the social media platform dictate it.
Musk, whose ownership of the company has been riddled with controversy, posted the poll this morning on his own account.
He said he would abide by whatever the result was.

 

[Metaphor]

What is Doxing?

Doxing (sometimes written as Doxxing) is the act of revealing identifying information about someone online, such as their real name, home address, workplace, phone, financial, and other personal information. That information is then circulated to the public — without the victim's permission.

So basically what Elon Musk did when he posted the number plate of a complete stranger and pretty much everything Libs of Tik Tok has done.

Libs of Tik Tok does not dox people. Libs of Tik Tok retweets others people's tweets.

If people can trace personal information from a number plate, then that would be doxxing. I don't think they can, though.

Got it.

In further developments from this brave warrior of free speech:

Twitter bans linking to rival social media websites, including Facebook, Instagram and Mastodon

Twitter's new owner Elon Musk makes another move to crack down on certain speech, after he shut down a Twitter account last week that was tracking the flights of his private jet.

www.abc.net.au

This is why I say fuck free speech. Conservatives have hijacked its original meaning and use it nowadays to mean "I want to be a bigoted cunt and be free of consequences".

You'll have to get over it. Musk didn't want to buy Twitter, he tried to get out of it, but the elites at the top of Twitter forced his hand.

 

[Metaphor]

OMG! But posting someone's real time location is really just posting their assassination coordinates! How can you justify the public publishing of Musk's ASSASSINATION COORDINATES???!!!

Because it was with their permission.

This isn't hard, zorq.

Lol, your convenient definition for doxx isn't universal. Most are more generic. It is perfectly acceptable in the modern vernacular to doxx oneself. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/doxx#English But here we are with you splitting hairs authoritatively about a word that is still considered to be slang.

I am confident that almost nobody (unless they need to cling to a narrative) would describe posting information about yourself being in a place where tens of thousands of people are currently gathered as 'doxxing'. Or even 'self-doxxing'.

I'm allowed to take a video of myself jerking off and post it online if I want to. You are not allowed (in a moral sense) to take a video of me jerking off and post it online without my permission.

 

[Patooka]

Libs of Tik Tok does not dox people. Libs of Tik Tok retweets others people's tweets.

Libs of Tik Tok is most definitely nothing but a doxxing account. Not my problem you can't see it.

If people can trace personal information from a number plate, then that would be doxxing. I don't think they can, though.

AutoCheck.com

www.autocheck.com

How do you track a car with a number plate? | Jerry

Some websites allow you to track a car using a license plate number—but these services cost money.

getjerry.com

5 seconds of google.

You'll have to get over it.

Get over what? Musk buying Twitter? Never gave much of a fuck about it other than the popcorn entertainment he has provided with his idiotic hubris. Or do you mean calling out the hypocritical bullshit from "free speech warriors"? Because that's as natural to me as breathing.

Musk didn't want to buy Twitter, he tried to get out of it, but the elites at the top of Twitter forced his hand

Wrong. The man child had a temper tantrum because his ex was dating a trans woman. We are currently in the "finding out" phase of this tantrum. It really is that simple.

Anyone placing bets whether Musk will honour the poll he raised about him stepping down?

 

[Metaphor]

Libs of Tik Tok does not dox people. Libs of Tik Tok retweets others people's tweets.

Libs of Tik Tok is most definitely nothing but a doxxing account. Not my problem you can't see it.

Who has she doxxed?

If people can trace personal information from a number plate, then that would be doxxing. I don't think they can, though.

AutoCheck.com

www.autocheck.com

How do you track a car with a number plate? | Jerry

Some websites allow you to track a car using a license plate number—but these services cost money.

getjerry.com

5 seconds of google.

You should have spent more than 5 seconds.

Find Name and Address Using License Plate Number | The Law Dictionary

If you want to know how to find a name and address by using a license plate number, there are a few ways to seek out the driver's information.

thelawdictionary.org

You'll have to get over it.

Get over what? Musk buying Twitter? Never gave much of a fuck about it other than the popcorn entertainment he has provided with his idiotic hubris. Or do you mean calling out the hypocritical bullshit from "free speech warriors"? Because that's as natural to me as breathing.

Musk tweeting that he was attending the World Cup is not hypocritical.

Musk didn't want to buy Twitter, he tried to get out of it, but the elites at the top of Twitter forced his hand

Wrong.

That is exactly what happened. He tried to get out of it and Twitter sued him.