Switched back to @Tusky as my fediverse client (bye fedilab)

@mayel @Tusky I use both, but I prefer Tusky's cleaner UI. What made you switch?

@codewiz @Tusky

It's a political choice. Tusky decided to take a stance against fascism, while @fedilab is not.

@mayel @codewiz @Tusky @fedilab centralization does not suite such an anarchistic structure as a Fediverse. it’s all users’ (and yours too) and instance admins’ responsibility to fight fascism, not only developers’. and if you try to shift your responsibility to developers, it’s a questionable behaviour.

@fuzzylynx @Tusky @codewiz @fedilab

It is the responsibility of *all* of us! We should block them, and definitely not enable them. Everywhere we can.

To paraphrase Churchill: "Even though large [instances] have fallen or may fall into the grip of the odious apparatus of Nazis, we shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in the code, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight in the configs, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our federation, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the app stores, we shall fight in the servers and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender."

@mayel but you are trying to blur a border between a tool and a user of that tool. what you propose is literally kinda “let’s oblige baseball bats makers to make bats that do not work in the hands of nazis! let’s oblige gun makers to ban their guns from shooting in the hands of nazis! let’s oblige cell phone makers to mute their phones if they are used by nazis!” first, you try to fight consecuences, but not the cause. and second, you try to use wrong tools to realise right idea.

@Tusky @codewiz @fedilab

@fuzzylynx @fedilab @Tusky @codewiz @mayel TBH if there were a way for a weapon to know it were wielded by a nazi, and makers failed to implement guns nazis couldn't use, that'd be a nuremberg trial right there.
Weapons nazis can't use sound like a good idea.
And, if you *know* someone is using your app to access a gab account, you *know* they're aligned to fascism, so choosing not to prevent them is rendering assistance.

@cathal we can exclude them from communication and therefore socially isolate and ostracise them. and there are already right tools to make it real. it’s server-level and application-level options, that are production-ready. and these tools are enough for that goal. deveopers already done all that they can. they just can’t keep track all domains, that people consider dangerous. it’s just a waste of their time. imagine that gab will buy a hundred of new domains. and what’s next? devs have to maintain actual black lists in their apps? %) it’s real scenario, and it can be avoided by proper communication between instance admins and users.

@mayel @codewiz @Tusky @fedilab

@fuzzylynx @cathal @Tusky @codewiz @fedilab

Apps could implement something akin to adblockers, where users can subscribe to several blocklists curated by the community. And apps (whether client or server) and server admins could preconfigure defaults, just like extensions like uBlock Origin do.

@mayel I think this is a very good idea, not only on the application level, but also for instances and end users. It would be a much better way than word-of-mouth and public-service-announcement block recommendations.

Follow

That idea sounds exactly like mail blacklists (RBLs), which have already existed for some time, so I wonder if that infrastructure could be minimally modified for this purpose.

tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5782

@therealraccoon @mayel

Sign in to participate in the conversation
social.coop

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!