I mentioned democratic decision-making around defederation but it’s likely other changes will be needed as well.

Be the change you want to see in the world. You don’t have to code in an integrated solution; all you’d have to do is set up an online poll, listing all of the other instances up for consideration (such a list can be pretty easily obtained - for example from https://lemmy.fediverse.observer/list ), run a new poll on regular intervals, say, every 2 months, and let anyone who is interested vote. Then, you update the defederation list based on the results of the poll.

However, I think you’ll quickly run into the other problems I outlined which, unfortunately, can’t really be changed. You could require everyone who’s participating in the voting to also be contributing time or money to run the server, except that then you’re operating a plutocracy, not a democracy, so most likely, you’ll need to be giving up your time and money to make your desired server administration a reality.

I’m not sure why you’re giving a history lesson when I already acknowledged that point in the comment you are replying to.

It’s because, despite claiming to have acknowledged the problem, you’re still making such an incredible false equivalency - comparing joining a new Lemmy instance to moving out of an authoritarian country - that you either completely misunderstand what you’re talking about, or you’re arguing in bad faith.

Sure, I theoretically could create my own instance, but then I would have the same problem as current instance admins, even those who are sympathetic to these ideas, as I suspect Lemmy.world and my own are. That there is no structure within Lemmy to enable collective decisions to be made or executed, and I would need to build them from scratch.

You’d have full control over your instance, and could, if you built up a community, use any online voting method you wanted - of which there are plenty - to poll your userbase and gather their opinions.

However, ultimately, you’d be the one paying for the instance, and doing the work to set it up and keep it updated and running. What would you do if you attracted a userbase that had views that were completely counter to your own? What if you attracted the alt-right crowd, and what got voted into place was all hate-speech, nazi rhetoric, and intolerance? (I assume you disagree with these things…) Would you continue paying for and hosting the instance, just because that’s what was democratically decided, even though it’s no longer an instance that you want to participate in? Could anyone really fault you for not wanting to do that?

A better method might be for you to make clear your own opinions - either via a post explaining them, or via a pre-defined federation / defederation plan - and let people join your instance who agreed with those decisions. Which, incidentally, is how most instances currently operate.

One could also simply move to another country if desired.

That’s nowhere near as easy for the majority of people - especially those in authoritarian countries - as you’re making it out to be.

North Korean defectors are North Korean people who left North Korea to become citizens in a new country. In North Korea, it is against the law to leave North Korea without permission. North Koreans are also not allowed to change their own citizenship, so anyone born a North Korean must also die a North Korean. The punishment for leaving North Korea without permission is extremely harsh. People who are caught are usually sent a prison camp or put to death in public. Like many other crimes in North Korea, illegally leaving the country may not only punish the accused, but also his or her family up to three generations.

The fact that there I can choose which authoritarian system I want to be under means little when they are all quite similar. I don’t know of any instances that have such democratic governance. They are all run by their admins as they see fit. It would be like choosing if I want to live in North Korea or Nazi Germany. Sure, they might be different in some ways, but I don’t have a real voice in decisions either way.

Anyone can start an instance. Make your own, and federate with whomever you want. Nobody’s stopping you.

So, you are right that admins imposing defederation unilaterally is an authoritarian action in line with things the North Korea or other repressive governments have done, though obviously far less severe due to the lack of violent enforcement behind it.

What? It’s nothing like that at all. Your instance isn’t a country; you aren’t stuck there. You can go wherever you want. You can read content on multiple instances.

It’s more akin to CNN deciding not to run a story that Newsmax is covering. You can have more than one source for your news.

I think you have a point here, although I think the issue is less with defederation itself, which is an important tool to manage conflict between instances, but rather with the lack of democratic governance in instances themselves.

Instances are run by individuals, who in turn have the power to run those instances as they see fit. If you dislike how a particular instance is being run, move to a different one, it’s as simple as that.

Nobody’s being censored. Anyone can go to lemmygrad and read their content. They’re not even being deplatformed - nobody’s preventing them from posting anything their instance allows on that instance. It’s closer to curation than censorship… instances are free to curate the content they host. If you don’t like the curation of a given instance, just move to a different one.

Alternately, maybe it’s the case that doing something bad to bring attention to another bad thing isn’t okay just because the thing you’re trying to bring attention to is worse.

I actually support the protests where they’re throwing soup on paintings or whatever. Those paintings don’t really matter, but some people sure think they do, and it’s effective to get a dialog going. Libraries are a public good, one of the few we really have left. It’s like ransacking a food bank to draw attention to starving people in Gaza; it’s not helping the cause they ostensibly care about, but it is hurting others.

I’m responding to your implication that actions in protest that get people talking about the issue are inherently valuable and worth taking. To make the point that that is not the case, I am using an extreme example to demonstrate a scenario where your statement is (I hope) objectively false.

I think I clearly stated my counter-point, which is that just because we’re talking about it doesn’t mean it is an effective or worthwhile form of protest to be engaged in.

I’m not really sure where you’re confused here.

If I went and shot someone in the name of Gaza awareness, and painted these messages on the sidewalk using their blood, that would be getting talked about, too. Point being, there’s effective forms of protest that we still shouldn’t be using.

I am 100% confident that American policy on Israel will also shift thanks to progressive voices. And it will not require a progressive majority.

I’d love to be proven wrong, but I don’t believe this will happen while Biden is president. Not to say I’m not going to vote for him - I’m not that stupid, but he’s made it pretty clear that he will stand with Israel more or less no matter what they do.

I do worry that he’s upsetting a lot of people to the point that they won’t vote for him, though, and that’s scary to me. He comes across as very weak when he capitulates to Israel this hard. He’s repeatedly said, “This is the line, don’t cross it!”, then when they do, he moves the line. If he loses to Trump in November, I’ll have a hard time not blaming Israel and his policies in dealing with them for that loss.

I don’t think you really have a lot of choices to be honest.

Therein lies the problem. We don’t have a lot of choices. Voting for new, progressive candidates feels great and it’s nice to pat ourselves on the back and think we’re making a difference, but the fact of the matter is that voting for a candidate who has no realistic path to winning is only even a realistic option when the candidate with the ‘D’ next to their name is all but guaranteed to win. And yeah, I’d really love to be able to make a statement by splitting the leftist vote between the democratic candidate and a progressive one; I’d really love to tell the democrats to get fucked and vote for a progressive third-party for every seat, but right now is far from the time for that, especially in states where those races are actually close. The last thing we need is to pack the House and Senate with republicans who win something like 40/30/30 because we couldn’t unify behind someone who actually had a chance of winning.

Not to mention, we only get to vote in 1 state’s elections, and often times there aren’t even any progressive down-ballot candidates on the ballot to vote for.

It won’t stop as long as American voters care much more about gas prices than about human rights. American politicians are willing to sponsor genocide to have some control on oil prices in order to win elections.

Who should we vote for to stop what’s going on? Please, enlighten me.

I can’t help but feel that Dwight would be a much better friend to have than Jim.

Yeah, I suppose I should clarify - that was in response to the objection to paying for pirated content; it’s different from the service provider’s point of view, but from the end user’s point of view, they’re paying for pirated content either way.

Can’t see it on desktop web.

This doesn’t seem that different from paying for usenet. It’s not like they’re making DVDs of pirated movies and selling them on the street corner; they were basically just aggregating content and the service they were providing was making it easily searchable and accessible, not doing the actual pirating, from the sound of it, unless I’m misunderstanding the situation.

Anecdotally, when I was a kid, we had an electrical issue wherein a short or something was causing wires to slowly melt through their jacket, inside the wall. It was triggering smoke detectors, but we couldn’t see or smell anything. Fire department came out and found it, but if we’d ignored it, it almost definitely would have been a huge house fire eventually. Definitely second this advice. It doesn’t cost anything to have them come look.

“During World War II, Churchill told the United States, ‘give us the tools, we’ll do the job.’ And I say, give us the tools and we’ll finish the job a lot faster,” Netanyahu said in the video.

Yeah, that’s what we’re afraid of, and exactly why we don’t want to give you the weapons.

I’d consider one, but it’d have to pay considerably more. Like, 50% or more above what I’d otherwise expect for a fully remote position, and it would have to be an easy commute.

In most cases it’s adding 20-30% to the length of the work day when the commute is included, plus costs of transportation itself. Plus the general inconvenience and the fact that it’s almost always going to mean a more toxic culture. But if the pay and benefits were absolutely fantastic, I’d consider it, at least short-term.

I wish I could show my country next to my username or something lol.

You could use a vanity username with a flag emoji in it, if you really wanted to.

We had one pandemic, yes…

But what about second pandemic?