Sites should empower parents to control that. Have a sign in by default and an option to ask the site to block ips associated with you to be able to sign up for more accounts.

Are there ways around it? Sure. It’s a just a lock to keep honest kids out. If your kid doesn’t feel comfortable about asking about stuff like this or feel like they have to around you, you aren’t going to win, they’ll find it, and it’ll be a blast for them. If you talk about it, at least acknowledge the issues with it, say when it is and isn’t appropriate, etc it’ll do leagues better then all bans and censorship attempts in the world.

I’m ok with instances defederating because it gives them time to wait and see how to handle the influx and what other unknowns might happen, but I agree that it’s just not a strategy to stop EEE. We need to do more and do it smartly.

To me it’s like a trade war, we have a couple strategies we can do. Isolationism is one of few options that I can think of that has only failed historically. I’m ok with protectionism even better when it’s just reusable user protections, like automating ad blocks, sponsored content blocks/labels, etc, but also maybe we do things like not federation communities from Threads, definitely blocking anything that isn’t in the open spec.

Already made luckly https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/issues/3837 i just found it today though

Also, the comments don’t seem to be syncing correctly between the peertube video and the community post. Peertube apparently supports using accounts from other fediverse instances, but it failed for this account I am using now.

Other integration point, but I’m less sure. Syncing peertube accounts with other instances, so my subscriptions can follow me and my comment/threads can too!

Now this is what I am talking about! Just get lemmy/kbin/etc to support embedded video from peertube at least and we are getting closer to the decentralized everything app!

I’m mean, I’m loving it too. My interest are well catered here, but most of my friends see it as a ghost town when they try it, because they are open source tech enthusiasts with a penchant for left wing politics. Like this is my niche and I love it, but also I have to get on other platforms if I want to actually talk to anyone outside the choir.

Weird middle ground here. I kind of wish that 1 communities FROM threads were blocked, and 2 we had an active dev fund for ad blockers. I’m glad to have threads users come here and add to our communities personally.

That’s a really good point imho. Maybe Google just made a better product… or at least a more accessible product.

How do we stop EEE or the other option being irrelevant to most of the world? I don’t think defederation does either.

Fully agree. I feel like helping facebook keep their users stuck on their platform or worse Twitter feels counterproductive in making the world more free.

If it’s on the darkweb or deepweb then MAYBE they are not, but the reason the rest of the web is not considered part of those groups is because Google/Meta/Microsoft/etc scrape it, categorize it, and process it.

In the Fediverse community context, I would say you have “Instances”, “Communities”, and “Users”. Most communities operate in as a Benevolent Dictator .

Which is defined by the template like this: The Benevolent Dictator holds ultimate decision-making power, until the group is ready for a more inclusive structure.

• Values: Servant leadership, singular vision, voluntarism
• Membership: Participation is open to anyone who wants to join, but the Benevolent Dictator can remove participants at will.
• Autocracy: The Benevolent Dictator has authority and can change the group’s governance as necessary.
  • Delegation: The Benevolent Dictator can invite participants to help with managing the group.
  • Expiration: When the group is sufficiently mature, the Benevolent Dictator will establish a more inclusive structure.
  • Executive: The Benevolent Dictator is responsible for implementing—or delegating implementation of—policies and other decisions.
  • Lobbying: If participants are not happy with the Benevolent Dictator’s leadership, they may voice their concerns or leave the group.

With the dictator being the Admin at the instance level, and the Mod at the community. With users being able to choose to leave to other dictators if they disagree with how they rule. A lot of these are implicitly allowed in the structure of lemmy, but if you wanted to explicitly define them, I am not sure what the best way would be. I.E. The Lobbying, how could you define how that is allowed or expected. Or defining what powers the autocrat has and explicitly saying to whom is delegated too at the moment.

There is also the idea of tooling to help move from dictatorships to something like elected boards or petition or even jury.

Oh, very cool! What are some of the slower parts of the process?

It seems to be a no code markdown editor for creating a community high-level description and key aspects. The lack of what to do next with that is bothering me at least personally. I feel like there is some step of taking this a actually plugging in proccess and people that is missing.

I personally, at the moment, just see it as a nice way to make a strategic choice what you WANT a community to be. With the rest of something left as a to-do kind defined by the strategic requirements.

I don’t disagree with needing to not repeat past mistakes.

The most free people. Best for society. Etc.

|They’re welcome to come here whenever they like .

Only if they know it exists and can still connect with the people and communities they care about. This is what the federated approach was supposed to fix, the silos, the community capture.

That’s kind of what I am going for!

I’d love to see your work when you’re ready!

Imagine getting carded by your phones AI (random person on task rabbit) because you look to young to look at porn.