|
Top-level
 βMeta's plans to offer automated moderation tools to fediverse adminsβ You know these are opt-in tools being proposed, where Threads/Meta is willing to leverage it's engineering org to provide tooling to help the fediverse in some way, right? You don't have to use said tools, you can just ignore them. 17 comments
 @thisismissem as I posted last night... the conspiracy theories and other speculations are (as you rightly pointed out in this thread) exhausting! https://macaw.social/@andypiper/112350599989018985 @andypiper yeah, only, as now mentioned in that article at the end, I thoroughly rebuked it in this: https://medium.com/@thisismissem/why-a-hard-fork-of-mastodon-isnt-the-way-b37aecfe5c86  @thisismissem This is a seriously disingenuous crop to do and not explicitly disclaim what you did and why.  @thisismissem full poll results are here: https://infosec.exchange/@thenexusofprivacy/112294665652523312  @thisismissem Regardless of what they offer... many of us don't want anything to do with Meta. Or Twitter. It's a poisoned chalice as far as many of us are concerned.  @tamitha @thisismissem right and part of this is that it's incredibly frustrating to see how immature the never-threads people are on so many levels They just can't be pleased And their ideas and asks are so disjoint from reality as far as current staffing and funding. So it's just... So... Exhausting. Because they don't understand how open source development and maintenance works. And I think MissEm does. @risottobias @tamitha it's also 100% okay to not take software anyone offers. Whether that's from Meta or what I work on at IFTAS. But there's certainly things we can all learn from others. e.g., I've some Ideas for improving moderation in mastodon & pixelfed, directly inspired by Software I've seen elsewhere for moderation purposes.  @thisismissem @risottobias @tamitha Learning from each other is good. Yet we still have to keep in mind that Meta is, as a whole, an abusive and outright dangerous company no matter how nice those who work there are. Those who make the calls are not. I shall be damned if those tools Meta will offer can be self-hosted without any legal or technical catch to them. @Natanox @risottobias @tamitha short answer is "we don't know" regarding those tools. @thisismissem @risottobias @tamitha That is technically correct. That doesn't mean one should give Meta even a slither of trust about anything. If they want to contribute tools by making them Open-Source and self-hostable with a proper license like AGPL, sure. However doing or accepting anything else with/from Meta would just be ridiculously ignorant at this point. @Natanox @risottobias @tamitha for what it's worth, Meta has already been opensourcing tooling for trust and safety, e.g., https://github.com/facebook/ThreatExchange/ The algorithms from which power StopNCII.org to my knowledge. @Natanox @thisismissem @tamitha already open sourc'd lol. |
Gregory's Server
Like, Renaud's proposal has nothing to do with Threads or Meta saying "hey, we've moderation tools we could maybe open up if you want them"
In fact, his proposal is still at the stage it was last year (much like FIRES), because we had to wait for funding.
And it certainly isn't favouring Meta, just enabling anyone who wants to build more advanced, possibly automated tools, for enhancing moderation teams.
It's a direct reaction to those demanding spam tooling.