@fraying

Hi Derek!

And greetings from the remote mountain regions of #Humboldt where we export the genetics for those 🌺 flowers 🤘💀🤘

Anyway...

I'm trying to your post in which you both misconstrued and misinformed the reader with alarmist, and generally misunderstood narrative.

Specifically, and respectfully:

>***"I wonder if people using mastodon know that, without section 230, no one could legally afford to run a mastodon instance in the US. Section 230 protects what we do here every day. Politicians threatening 230 are threatening free speech on the internet."***

Although we'll go over both sentences, the part that I really take exception to is the first one:

- "I wonder if people using mastodon know that, without section 230, no one could legally afford to run a mastodon instance in the US."

I quoted you twice for emphasis, because what you said is simply NOT TRUE, at all Derek, but who would want to run a single user mastodon server instance anyway?

Okay a select few, but it's not economical to do so - here's why:

It's such #bloatware and a #resource_hog compared to other, more capable and featureful #Fediverse servers, like #Pleroma, #Takahē, #Epicyon, #Akkoma, #Calckey, #Soapbox, #Friendica, #Socialhome, #MicroblogPub, #Misskey, #Smithereen, and the list goes on and on for a while; a veritable laundry list of platforms endowed with more feature rich, more resource and energy conserving footprints.

You could call mastodon the white elephant in the room when it comes to kruft, waste of energy and resources, or lack of the most desired features by it's traditional userbase (although people are nowadays migrating their accounts to these other Fediverse platforms in ever increasing numbers).

Like you, I'm also a staunch proponent of Section 230, as it was originally intended and written - to protect publishers, NOT editors. But most of the conservative agendas to which you refer only seek to remove protections for sites that cross that line between that of #publisher to that of #editor anyway - so as long as you don't interfere with a user's #speech those deprecated silos would have nothing to worry about.

It's the Marxist/Leftist agendas in Congress that you need to worry about - they're proposing complete evisceration of section 230 - and yes, that would jeopardize, probably even put those monolithic deprecated silos out of business for good.

- I see very little that is bad about killing a rabid animal... Or a fox in the henhouse.

But... riddle me this Batman:

What would be so bad about that? It would destroy the surveillance plutocracy and data farming of individuals and their identities by those socalled, "Big-Tech" subjugation engines like #Faceplant, #InstaSPAM, #Reddit, #Twitter, and to a large degree, #Google too... (It won't do anything to stop the likes of Amazon or Apple though wrt their surveillance programs).

All if that, while at the same time encourage the migration of people to a fully decentralized and safer social media network where there are either no platforms (only censor proof protocols), as in #nostr; or #federated #SmallWeb and single user #ActivityPub platform instances; or those #Fediverse platforms that vow not to #molest_users who #publish on those platforms by imposing draconian #editorializing (censorship) upon their users.

Either way you can certainly look at this as a win-win situation for the #individual in #social_media networking. The question really is therefore, "How badly do you wish to punish the privacy disrespecting subjugation farms that comprise that deprecated, monolithic silo space?"

I hope that helps, Enjoy!

#tallship

⛵

.