You are reiterating my point that Lemmy currently doesn't allow unrestricted federation (by supporting/allowing Tor) and also reiterating my point that there should be a version of Lemmy that actually works, but you're weirdly trying to reframe both points into insulting me. Why?
Didn't ask. I pointed out that you were lying, and that the thread's current vote scores reveal a community with a prevalence of either liars, or gullible/lazy people. I also hinted that people who find this confusing should try looking up how Tor works for apps that don't integrate it (or its "binary")
So you're too cowardly to admit your thought processes and feelings to a stranger you've trolled on the internet, or you're too selfish / too addicted to trolling to stop when asked directly.
And apparently one of those opinions is that it's fun to see people banned from political discussion, which means you're one of the people granting some the authority to ban others, and apparently that makes you think it isn't authority, which makes no sense, because nothing about the word "authority" makes it have everyone exempted from self-related things like it.
You considered that the admins of lemmy instances would implement rules regardless of what the audience thinks?
Yes, and since that was so weird, I looked into it more, and found out federation doesn't really work due to the authorities, which makes more sense than thinking there's just no anti-censorship server admins aware of Lemmy.
I seriously doubt it functions on the charity of electric bill payers. Given it doesn't use Tor, and DNS and IP addresses rely on generating "profit" for corporations (really just returning funds to the authorities, but you're calling it "profit" because they have brand names on bank accounts taking in more money than they send out), it must be "profitable" or it would be taken offline.
So what? If someone is a nazi, people don’t tend to want to talk to you. Who knew.
Again, didn't ask. Why do you keep injecting random side topics like this?
For the millionth time, Lemmy is censored by the authorities today.
Docs say Tor federation isn't allowed. This means the authorities can just defederate any instance from every other instance by blocking the domain name or IP address. This explains why there are no zero-censorship instances.
There is no org to join that would have a better use of my time than using my technical and political knowledge to explain what I'm explaining, though you people making me repeat the explanations like this do impact the efficiency of the whole process.
I'm annoyed people are wasting my time with replies like this, and I'm also pointing out that Lemmy won't really be useful until federation works properly, which would currently require Tor.
That's the whole point of my original post. Don't know how many times I have to repeat it. Lemmy uses DNS / IP addresses, stops Tor from being used, can't have free speech instances under this configuration. Might need new code, not just new instance
The people who have the authority to control what is on the Fediverse, currently, are Lemmy, Mbin and Piefed instance owners and admins.
You are leaving out the authorities that these people answer to so far, or including them in "owners" without being clear enough about it.
No-one has applied pressure so far as I know.
Yet again, for the millionth time you people make me repeat this: I am aware some of you have the censorship fetish and it makes it hard for you to see when a person is censored, because you can be too busy enjoying it. My post invites you to try using words objectively and telling the truth.
Sorry, are you alleging that the instance owners of lemmy.world or lemmy.ml or lemmy.zip are dictated by the president? (I don’t know what you mean by ICANN)
Yes. ICANN is the term for people who are "given authority" to click buttons on computer screens that make your .com name stop working. President of the United States is the term for people who are "given authority" to write papers that give other people authority to shoot/imprison the ICANN guys if they don't click those buttons for the .com names they're told to. These are examples of the people in the bigger group collectively called "the authorities"
So far, this makes it impossible to find any instances that won't block posts. ICANN would click a button that says "block this .com name for allowing child porn" or the President would write a paper that says "shoot/imprison the ICANN people for refusing to click the button" and so far people aren't really trying hard enough to take authority away from those people. Making instances that would get blocked doesn't really even seem worth trying when Tor can't be used to try to bypass the blocking.
That you want no censorship doesn’t bind us either. I am not obliged to change my positions because you don’t like it.
Are you implying that once Lemmy overtakes Reddit, it will be censored by the government if TOR isn’t implemented?
Lemmy is censored by the authorities today.
Governments would probably not censor Lemmy. Censorship seems more like the type of thing you get when you give authority to criminals who don't believe in governance. For example, a lot of the people with the authority to censor the internet are Republicans and Democrats, who identify with parties of war crimes and slavery and stuff, not governance.
First, it’s not known if Lemmy would overtake Reddit
Then what's the point?
Only memes, and only the low-stakes memes, at that?
Some of us miss the days when we could all talk on the internet, only bots were banned, and it felt like Republicans and Democrats were losing authority, and soon we could have a real government or something.
Some of us don't like how it's been decades and the human population has revealed itself to be too evil and stupid to get it done by now, spending all this time ruining the technology instead of using it.
secondly TOR isn’t implemented yet, but it’s also not a problem yet.
It is. It currently stops any zero-censorship instances from federating with any others, which helps keep things in the same position they were in a few years ago, when all of us were probably on reddit. We have roughly the same percentages of people in the same groups going through the same increasing levels of splintering, isolation, growing mental illness, etc.
You can find a group of commies sharing an evolving set of commie ideas together, and a group of Nazis sharing an evolving set of Nazi ideas together, and the authorities keep finding new ways to make sure nobody goes anywhere too interesting or listens to anyone too smart. We do not suddenly have ambulance rides for free due to everyone's TV screens suddenly showing them Noam Chomsky every day
An Instance is an Instance on a major profit-making network that relies heavily on advertisers.
It being an Instance instead of a subreddit doesn't really matter, and neither does how major it is, or that it makes profit, or that there are advertisers.
The issue is that there are centralized groups of people given authority to control the entire space, so other, smaller groups can't have their own authority over their own discussions without self-isolation.
You could make Tor as major and profit-making as you want and people can advertise on it all they want, and it doesn't make Instances "subreddits," but Tor still wouldn't make it convenient for anyone to exert authority over what everyone else can post and see using Tor.
Just because you are one of the people giving them authority doesn't magically stop it from being authority. Authority isn't a word for "others" that each person exempts self-related things from. Why the fuck do I have to keep explaining this and copying and pasting where I addressed it in my original post?
this weird censorship fetish is extremely popular and most of you are happy to see bans happen to certain people, not just bots, so a small Lemmy that censors certain people feels fundamentally different from a big reddit that censors more people.
People who are given authority is what the word means. In this context, that would mean people who are given the authority to censor posts online. That should be pretty clear.
Currently instance owners design their own terms of service. They aren’t dictated to by any other “authority”.
Then by "instance owners" you mean ICANN and the other ("other than ICANN") authorities that design the terms of service allowed on federated instances, not the individual admins of each instance, so it doesn't matter that they aren't dictated to by "other authorities" ("other than the ones that dictate these things")
On the other hand, maybe you're just incorrect, and using "instance owners" to mean the individual admins of each instance, who are dictated to by authorities like ICANN and the President, who are filed under "other than instance admins"
And yes, I am not a free speech absolutist.
So when you asked who I'm calling authorities, you are one of the people who give them authority to censor the internet, and possibly one of the people given such authority. You should be more familiar with these words.
What’s your point?
My main point is that Lemmy needs Tor federation in order to do what it ostensibly tries to do: solve reddit's problems.
My point in this subthread is that it's remarkable how a lot of you reply trying to justify censorship, like I didn't make it clear I'm not open to bullshit - and meanwhile the thread is downvoted to shit, so there aren't many people you could be trying to talk to other than me.
You are reiterating my point that Lemmy currently doesn't allow unrestricted federation (by supporting/allowing Tor) and also reiterating my point that there should be a version of Lemmy that actually works, but you're weirdly trying to reframe both points into insulting me. Why?