Gregory's Server@ajroach42 I think the lack of meaningful communication is at least partly due to the monolithic nature of birdsite. Hide in the forest, never get to know your neighbors, etc. This can be seen as a strength and a weakness. From a privacy perspective, I trivially enjoy living in a big, monolithic city and using it as cover from societal expectations.
|
6 comments
 @grunk I'm not sure I understand what you mean, and I don't want to respond to words I'm making up, rather than the ones you actually said. Could you clarify? @ajroach42 In my opinion, in mastodon, there's a natural inclination to dox yourself. Put this in the hand of 1 or a few powerful instances without regulatory oversight, then it's a recipe for abuse. Thus, with a big enough incident, government will step in and fediverse will change forever. @grunk Ah. We'll see when the time comes, I suppose. We'd have to have a functional enough government to actually Do something, and I don't know that we do in the US. Maybe Europe will be the place that kills mastodon. @ajroach42 Regarding the contingency plan aspect, if we consider each instance as a subsystem of a larger system (i.e. fediverse), best practice dictates that, at the very least, each instance should have its own contingency plan. That's obviously not the case today nor is it required by norm or regulation. So, we're behind. Ideally, we'd be talking about a contingency plan at the fediverse level. @grunk I think it's presumptive to assume that there isn't some kind of support network and some kinds of contingency plans in place. You're new. Some of us go way back. Our threat models are not all the same, but we're not flat footed idealists. |
@ajroach42 This cover will weaken in a Mast world. With this, civil responsibility is distributed to the instances. Unfortunately, all it takes is 1 catastrophic incident to ruin the fediverse for everyone. What is our contingency plan?