The #Fediverse is starting to feel too hostile to technology and #AI for my liking.

@crw We do need a way to differentiate between bots or get rid of them altogether, and user accounts.

@elshara@www.mediacy.net Yes, I know a few human accounts that could be shut down immediately. Seriously though, it doesn't matter whether the content comes from humans, humans using bots, or humans using bots that utilize AI content. Because, why we watch Sci-Fi movies or play video games.

Here in Europe, people talk about digital sovereignty. But the reality is, they're fleeing Meta, X, and TruthSocial to have curated content served up to them.

You (the society as whole) can label or frame anything, but you should ask yourself if that was ever the true idea behind the Fediverse.

@crw If we run our own server instances, we are in full control over who we block, and why we block them at multiple levels. If this control was not given to us, we would be no different than FB.

@crw I can't say the fediverse is fool proof, but it's a great deal less volatile than other platforms. NOSTR has its down sides more so than its up, because the communication style only works if you are even more of a tech centered person with easy ways to write down hard to remember things like user IDs and encryption keys, things like that. You can still do that with the fediverse, without much of a hastle depending on what platform you connect to it with. It's just like email, accept you can also subscribe to posts which by default, are like lists. The only thing I wish fediverse platforms had, would be a way to regulate hashtags. Because anyone can just post to them without requiring approval to post. But this is again where client side filters come into play, which not a lot of other platforms actually have. Let alone server platforms, as well.

@elshara@www.mediacy.net Are you sure you're in control? A core problem with Mastodon is precisely this blocking, which has become a form of preemptive obedience. If someone blocks someone else and you, as an admin, don't reciprocate, you'll end up on a FediBlock list faster than you think. So it's not about freedom of choice, but rather the influence of more prominent figures. Which, in turn, just makes it a new Facebook.

@elshara@www.mediacy.net

to write down hard to remember things like user IDs and encryption keys

@crw In an ideal world, the tool would not be used to weaponize someone for their opinion. But the world we live in, uses it to the enth degree. So honestly, having it there and not using it, speaks louder to your commitment to leave open channels of communication open. And I think, being transparent about something like that, is the best solution. Then you run the risk of being labelled a spam supporter, but I digress. You can't please everyone. In an ideal world, you don't block anyone. You control who you allow into your circle but then you run the risk of them disagreeing with you, and your circle empties out due to it being too stale. You need to be able to discover social trends in ways that creates further ambition however slight it may be. But you don't want that turning poisonous against the people who support your journey to obtain that either. And the problem I have with these privacy only tools, is that things that don't see the light of day, weaponize them for really shady purposes. Then they restrict the common person due to that exposure of prolonged service use cases, onto everyone which is why FB ends up becoming the shithole that it is. In 2004 if you would have shown that version of FB to its founder, in 2026, would he have built it? No. I don't think so. And that's my point. The fediverse allows you to still be relevant enough, and other projects as well, to still say yes I'd try this. Not just for who you agree or disagree with, but because you are the experience of your efforts as well as a social person with a tiny website responsibility to uphold on the side. But it's not blatantly in your face, the way an FB group would be or a reddit thread could be today. The inability to cap regulation control has inshitified the internet and quite honestly, the only solution to that, is more self hosted instances that see the light of day. Otherwise, you end up with a service like Telegram that just gets banned. Or if decentralized media becomes too dark, unable to be installed on any OS at the app level due to restrictions on acceptable forms of identification the OS tracks. Even if you do use some obscure form of Linux, that's where we're headed if we don't use common ways of identification that are easily memorable so they don't get weaponized for being too unstoppable in situations, that need them to be. According to who ever uses fear as a way of controlling what you can and can't do, say or become online that is. Just take a look at Matrix, and how badly their clients have inshitified that app experience...I'm looking at you, Element. things like this, look important, feel interesting, serve a tiny purpose, but come with too much extra overhead that doesn't meet the end goal of what someone wants to do to sell that as its only point to get popular enough to justify keeping it around unless you need absolute security. And that involves things like ensuring apps like Signal don't centralize data streams it knows about. ON the fediverse, you've got logs to make sure that doesn't happen. What other servers do with your public posts, is on you to ensure they remain in your control to share or not. But what you do with your data on your server instance, is your choice. And to have the option to put that first, is what people thought the internet in its entirety would allow us to create no matter what protocol we used in the beginning of the 80's / 90's with news groups and email lists, that later graduated to open forums.