I’ve been thinking. Every mainstream social media is age verificated now. But sites such as SomethingAwful, 4chan and the Fediverse weren’t. So why are we trying to populate it if the Fedi’ was popular too, we would ALSO be verificated and spywared (made up this word for this post’s sake)?
Age Verification laws, if they are ever enforced against the fediverse, will be enforced against instances, rather than the fediverse as a whole. So the federales will come for feddit.online, or lemmy.world or mastodon.social. The trouble is, to get the fediverse writ large taken down, you have to get every instance down all at once, otherwise the instances will just keep federating content between them. This seems impractical and kind of unlikely to succeed.
The key word being “instance” - they’d have a helluva time trying to take down the whole thing altogether. Much like pirate sites, chop one head off & two more will take its place. Communities will just migrate & reestablish footing elsewhere. If the feds do it enough, then backup plans will become automatic where instances back each other up.
Sure you can make the technology more resilient but if the enforcement is punitive enough then it won’t matter.
Which nation has what it takes to shut down 30,000+ Fediverse servers worldwide?
Which federal state has?
You really think Mississippi State Police can take down even only one Misskey or CherryPick server running in Japan?
Then what’s to stop them from making a law forbidding doxxing-law-abiding instances from federating with instances that don’t force users to doxx themselves?
Perhaps they could. I’m just not clever enough to know how you would draft the legislation or enforce the law – how is a complaint instance supposed to identify a noncomplaint instance, short of checking everyone’s id again?
You openly defy it. Fuck you, Make me. Jurisdiction hop, darknets, etc.
What law? Where? How could it even be enforced on something completely decentralized?
They could go after some locally hosted instances I guess but the federated platforms as a whole do not have a “home base” and trying to enforce such a rule would be difficult if not impossible in practice (never mind that age verification was never about protecting anybody).
This is completely wrong
Age Verification laws have nothing to do with Fediverse “popularity”
They have only to do with the political jurisdiction of your instance, and the political jurisdiction of you as a viewer
I’m pretty sure ze’s (accurately) talking about how many of the enacted age verification régimes only mandate it for platforms with certain amounts of monthly active users.
If so, that’s actually a major advantage for us we should milk for all it’s worth
Legally it’s currently required if the instance is hosted under a jurisdiction with such laws.
Size or being mainstream doesn’t really matter with current legislations. All it takes is someone suing an instance over that and then owner would have troubles.
Selectively denouncing instances under these laws could basically dismantle the fediverse, specially if this laws end up being approved all across europe and north America.
That’s why you should probably take down your representative and put there someone who is not a moron.
Do these exist on Africa? Should someone make an african instance then?
I said Africa to mean African countries in general, smartypants.
Yes, that’s why the made the law. It’s supposed to stop any competition for the already privileged.
You can just join another instance that is outside the jurisdiction of these laws or run your own instance with closed sign ups since you don’t have to verify your own age (or the age of known friends if you offer access to them)
The fediverse is inherently resilient to this sort of law, it’s the laws that make platforms liable for the content posted to it, that are more of a concern for the fediverse.
Probably. Regulators usually care about reach, not architecture. If the Fediverse became genuinely mainstream, it would likely end up in the same political spotlight. The real difference is that federation makes compliance an instance by instance problem, not one global switch. That is much harder to enforce.
So, only the popular instance would get verification, not every one?
At present, most probably only those that appear on the regulatory radar in their own right.
thats not how it works. there is no company. if your server tries to age gate me, i’ll just use another.
The way things are looking now, your only option might be a server in North Korea.
In one description I saw, part of the criterion was algorithmic feeds i.e. viewer manipulation. Lemmy has a fairly wimpy form of that compared to something like Facebook, and it could be shut off entirely without any loss. If it were up to me I’d shut it off either way.
Decentralization may help, and not profiting off targeted advertising too I think.
The reason we lost a big chunk of the old forums over the past few years is due to much of this stuff too, but I think the fediverse may be a little more malleable to weather storms.
One can migrate accounts across servers, move to different jurisdictions, roll your own server and the interact across different fediverse platforms.
Afair Mastodon were looking to integrate email as a way to both get content and post content which could also help accessibility.
It wouldn’t - it should already.
Why, you ask? Because these laws almost always appear to be first and foremost tools of surveillance and control, not for legitimate reasons, so everyone’s in these laws’ scopes. It’s just easier to go for the bigger players first, or even the US companies as they need to respect the laws of countries they operate in by American law too.
Flying under the radar can only delay the problem so much, so if it concerns you, or whomever else for that matter, do push against these laws, and understand people need to be as resilient as those pushing in favor of these laws.
In theory, yes, but it would have to scale up significantly in order to be noticed. And then since it would be split across many difference instances would be a logistical nightmare for authorities.
It already did, in Australia. Aussie Zone adopted a unique way to verify us. We sent images to Molly (after Molly Ringwald) and that was enough for the federal government. Things like username at a pub. I’m old and have false teeth so I sent a pic of those.
No, they didn’t like it and they said so, but they found a way round that worked.
We sent images to Molly (after Molly Ringwald)
Who?
It was what they called their…whatever it is, I think it was an AI they used. I don’t know.
I think https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molly_Ringwald but nothing in the bio makes the reference make sense
Why would it be named after an American and not after Molly Meldrum?
It can but then again to counter it we have hash based protocols like reticulum and nostr
