Gregory's Server@mastodonmigration I think there are some important actions to take in the coming months to prepare for the federation with threads. Has anyone made a list of key things we should focus on to protect people in the fediverse? For example @evan talked recently about the importance of being able to delete replies from a thread you started. I think people should also be able to opt out of quote posts as another example. Is there a group of people already talking about this?
|
8 comments
 @mastodonmigration @evan great point. Mastodon already has a number of these built in which is a good start.  Kind of. Actually, the Mastodon Privacy Policy is very limited. It really only gives the instance the right to republish content and not share personal data. When user information and content starts crossing commercial entity lines things get much less defined and potentially problematic. Corporate applications have much different terms and many include license agreements for various purposes, including commercial purposes, which of course users agree to when they sign up. 1/ So, how do rights track content and personal data around this new open social web? If we can answer these questions and construct a satisfactory framework for both users and providers, before it turns into a mess and regulatory solutions start being fought over and mandated, we'd be way ahead and off to the races. @mike @mastodonmigration @evan Blocking threads/meta *is* part of being the open social web, because it's a necessary act of defense to keep us from becoming absorbed into Facebook like there NEEDS to be a part of federated social media that has no Facebook connection at all, in case Facebook tries some sort of buyout or copyright lawsuit or buying servers or incorporating proprietary tools or whatever @mike @mastodonmigration @evan To use a capitalist/business comparison (ugh), it's like refusing to let Walmart carry your products being a defense of your business, because at some point you will either be beholden to Walmart supply chains or standards or such, or Walmart selling your products will mean *no one* is buying them from you anymore, etc @mike @mastodonmigration @evan and then, your/your invention's/business's fate is entirely tied to Walmart, and that's worked out really poorly for people who've either sold out, been bought out, or been overwhelmed, because when the Walmart fails or goes out locally - they can't just pick up and start where they were before that @mike @mastodonmigration @evan either way, the best idea is to keep Big Blue Corporation out in the first place, *before* they devour and engulf everything special, unique, local - and then either run away with it or implode |
@mike @evan
Technical features are one thing. Not familiar with any organized work, but that doesn't mean there isn't any. But the other area which would go a very long way to addressing user concerns is explicit public data use and privacy terms. Thinking of an opt-in/out-out framework that gives users explicit control over their content and personal data. Such frameworks, particularly in the EU, are now common for internet services. If we want open social to work, we should do it here too.