• deweydecibel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    And here we go.

    This will be one of the Fediverse’s biggest obstacles.

    Need to get this under control somehow or else in a few years, tech companies, banks, and regulators will decide a crackdown on the fediverse as a whole is needed.

    • cerevant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The fediverse is the name for services that use ActivityPub - a communication protocol. What you are saying is like saying “tech companies, banks and regulators need to crack down on http because there is CSAM on the web”.

    • weedazz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      A few years? I bet Threads is doing this right now to shut down every private instance and take the fediverse for themselves. They’ll argue they are the only one that can moderate the content due to their size/resources

      • Kayn@dormi.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m afraid a blocklist won’t be enough. As anyone can just spin up an instance or move their existing one to a domain that isn’t in the blocklist yet, a centralized whitelist will be the safer solution.

      • LinkOpensChest.wav@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think they’re speaking from the point-of-view of an uneducated body of legislators and average people who will not understand this

        It doesn’t matter what we know the nature of the fediverse to be – it matters how they perceive it, and uninformed people are perfect targets for this type of FUD

        For example, the linked article exists