Notices by ophiocephalic 🐍 (ophiocephalic@kolektiva.social), page 3

New fedi rules just dropped:

1) Don't fuck with @AnarchoNinaWrites

2) When breaking previous rule, have salve ready. You'll need it for your torched ass

*Decentralization*

Prominent voices advocating for collaboration with the Zuckerberg surveillance entity sure do talk up decentralization a lot, when they're not advocating the subjugation of the fediverse to a single vertical silo of 100 million users. The irony, of course, is that they tend to be admins of instances with tens or even hundreds of thousands. And two of the most prominent control *multiple* mega-servers, which means they're not just overseeing centralized instances, they're hoarding them.

In contrast, by default Pixelfed servers are limited to a maximum of 1000 users. Though a deep dive into the parameters can override this, its status as a default is an affirmation of the decentralizing ethos. "Thou shalt keep thy instance small."

The microblogging space of the fediverse hasn't been allowed to develop an equivalent consciousness, as the agenda has been set by mega-server admins who drove the conversation around topics like "smooth onboarding". But these aren't evil people; the problem is that they have no real vision.

A comment circulated recently - receipt unfortunately not saved - suggesting that the development of fediverse tools useful to organizing community would be an effective alternative to the "how to funnel in granny" mentality, because then there would be incentives for entire communities to migrate in together; surely a more holistic view of "onboarding" than fretting over how to pick up confused and wandering individuals one at a time. *That* is the kind of exercise of technical *and* social imagination we need.

To become viable, the Free Fediverse will need to define itself by not just what it stands against - corporate enclosure by the Meta monstrosity - but by what it stands for. Real and actual decentralization - not just shallow lip service towards it - can be one of those foundational values.

This value can then be encoded into the technology, as it was with Pixelfed; because, let there be no doubt, Zuckerberg is not just absorbing certain of the fediverse's communities, but also certain of its technologies. We'll need replacements, but that's an opportunity to break the current state of developmental stagnation in the predominant microblogging service and ActivityPub. And more important still than protocols and apps are those who create them. Essentially, the Facebook Fediverse gets the techbros, but the Free Fediverse gets the catgirls - which means we win!

Real decentralization - lots and lots and lots of quite small communities, distinct yet federated - has already proven itself to be a better facilitator of good moderation, and will enable another important value to be addressed shortly. But on the moderation issue, a timely real-world example of why decentralization matters is instructive.

There has recently been a calamity visited upon our instance, Kolektiva. Among all of the discussion following its disclosure, there was not a full analysis of its chain of causality. Let's take a flyover of the recent timeline.

April - A massive spambot wave first hits mastodon-dot-social, then spreads quickly through the entire fediverse. Kolektiva, and many other servers, temporarily limit dot-social until the invasion is under control.

Early May - Another spambot attack hits masto-dot-social, and of course, everyone else. This time, an error is made, and a Kolektiva admin defederates rather than limits dot-social. All Kolektiva users irrecoverably lose their follows and followers from dot-social. There is disquiet.

Mid-May - In an attempt to restore the lost follow-follower data, a Kolektiva admin recovers a snapshot backup of the database from before the defederation, an operation which occurs with what turns out to be "spectacularly bad timing".

Receipt: https://kolektiva.social/@admin/110641928258590367

Yes, there was a fuckup; in fact, a fuckup compounded by another fuckup. But - beyond noting that both mistakes were attempts to do right by the users of the instance - the wellspring of the disaster actually wasn't Kolektiva, but mastodon-dot-social, that mega-server with hundreds of thousands of silo'ed users, open registration and next-to-no-moderation; that irresistible honeypot for spammers and scammers, that 500-pound gorilla with a bullseye painted on its ass.

The mother of all instances has repeatedly proven itself to be a problem for the rest of the fediverse, as in the examples above, when the admins of literally every other server federated with it were put in the position of having to locally address a crisis not of their origination, each an opportunity to make mistakes they would not otherwise have needed to risk.

Smaller instances are easier to moderate, larger instances more difficult. And if masto-dot-social is any indication, a large enough instance becomes a lost cause - take a look at dot-social's local feed and see if you agree. Decentralization distributes moderation agency more effectively, both to admins and even to users. And by scattering targets, it creates network resiliency against threats like spambots and crypto scams. Decentralization isn't just a foss-nerd buzzword, it yields tangible benefits for those seeking safer community online.

(edit - minor typo)

1/2

#FreeFediverse #FediPact #FediblockMeta #DefederateMeta #Meta #Facebook #Threads #FacebookFediverse #Democracy #Decentralization #Prefiguration #Kolektiva

Those who advocate for the surrender of the fediverse to the Zuckerberg surveillance entity have been busy mischaracterizing adherents of the FediPact alliance in various ways. More needs to be said about this, but for the moment, let's unpack one of their more persistent slurs, the claim that we are "gatekeeping".

The term itself is one they have inherited from Silicon Valley crypto-fascist propertarians who, themselves, have seized power by overseeing the construction of a number of rigidly gatekept "walled gardens"; and the corporation they are so eager to collaborate with and invite in to colonize the fediverse is one of the most draconian of those gatekeepers.

But why accept this metaphorical territory on which to battle? Beyond the "walled gardens" and "marketplace of ideas" of neoliberalism, anarchist thought provides an alternative lens for viewing the predicament - the ZAD.

Within the Zone To Defend - the acronym derives from the French equivalent - there is safety, autonomy, solidarity, and yes, real freedom - freedom to express *and* freedom *from* the poisoned expressions of those who seek to weaponize speech to declare others inferior, excluded, and unworthy of existence.

However, as often when ideal meets reality, a contradiction is encountered. The presence of a "zone" infers the dialectical presence of space which is not the zone. Ultimately, our autonomous zone is one we would like to see grow to be boundless, which would be the fulfillment of its natural condition.

But provisionally at least, our zone is situated in the world as it currently is; a world in which we are surrounded by enemies on all sides. We do not ourselves choose the boundaries, but we acknowledge them, as we must. Unhappily, the Zone To Defend is bounded, and at the boundaries, we make our stand.

The defense of the zone is necessary, not just to guard the terrain, but more importantly, to defend the souls who have taken refuge and find community within it. This is a conviction the Meta collaborators don't appear to be able to grasp. They hunker down in the topography of protocols and MAU analytics, unable to catch sight of the actual people nestled in its hills and valleys.

In fact, the boundaries of the ZAD are not calculated, but rather emerge spontaneously from the defensive needs of those within. Their struggles, traumas, defeats and victories form the positions, shapes and composition of the barricades. Those who point this out are sneered at; as in, for example, the recent blog post of a prominent mega-instance admin and pro-Meta activist, who rolled his eyes at the "almost religious overtones" of our argument. Speak of people rather than protocols, and one will be waved off as a woo-dazed fanatic.

The communards of the Zone To Defend don't want to live in a bounded world, but they have to. And certainly, there is no interest in swinging open the gate now, as they observe the approach of perhaps the most dangerous of enemies - a totalitarian empire which has claimed its power by enabling and profiting from exactly those elements and forces which the ZAD exists to shelter them against.

Sorry Zuckerbros, but we will be keeping our gates.

#FediPact #FediblockMeta #DefederateMeta #FreeFediverse #Meta #Facebook #Threads #Schism #FediSchism #Anarchism #ZAD #AutonomousZone #Prefiguration

@TheGoodSpace
Something that lots of folks in this convo are probably not aware of is that the Bad Space isn't just another blocklist or website. It's at the center of a plan called FSEP which (at least initially), during the setup of a new fediverse instance, would load the Bad Space blocklist, and only that blocklist, by default. If the scheme is deployed the instances on that list could end up being defederated from most of the fediverse. Agreement from only two "trusted sources" is required to affirm an entry on the Bad Space.

https://nivenly.org/docs/papers/fsep/

Those considering the use of the PhotoDNA surveillance process in the fediverse are advised to inform themselves on it first. It doesn't just detect "positives", it can also auto-report them to authorities. Implementing it could turn this network into an automated police-state snitching system. Admins who do not choose auto-reporting may be legally obligated to manually report positives.

Also (independently verified and officially contradicted), PhotoDNA is utilized not just to detect CSAM, but also "terrorist and violent extremist content". So who decides what constitutes this content? Why, the private unaccountable black box which is Microsoft Corporation, that shining beacon of privacy-respect to which a hash of every image uploaded to and federated across enabled instances would be sent. Microsoft indicates the data can be utilized for facial recognition and "AI" ingestion as well.

Do they - or will they - rate advocacy of Palestinian equality and Kurdish feminism as extremist, as governments they do business with would demand? Do they or will they accept the inputs of oil and pipeline corporations in determining what constitutes terrorism? How will they expand the parameters of disallowed sexual deviance if Trump wins the election next year?

Understand that this is already happening. Elements are in the Mastodon Github Issues calling for the addition of PhotoDNA right now. The Pixelfed project may also be adding it very soon. If that is true, antiauthoritarian instances should consider the feasibility of defederation from Pixelfed altogether.

For all those considering this: Stop. Please. All the "report" issued by the Facebook-mafia describes is the fediverse - and in fact, mostly its evil twin, the defediverse - just as it existed last month, last year, years before most on here had ever heard of it. The purpose of their influence operation is scare everyone into turning the fediverse into the kind of policed and surveilled space suitable to Mark Zuckerberg.

Microsoft FAQ on PhotoDNA:
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/PhotoDNA/FAQ

Microsoft Digital Safety Content Report, indicating use of PhotoDNA to detect extremism:
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/corporate-responsibility/digital-safety-content-report

Technical analysis of the PhotoDNA process:
https://hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?archives/931-PhotoDNA-and-Limitations.html

UN report referencing use of PhotoDNA to detect terrorism:
https://www.un.org/counterterrorism/sites/www.un.org.counterterrorism/files/countering-terrorism-online-with-ai-uncct-unicri-report-web.pdf

Transcript of 2018 US Senate hearing on terrorism and social media, referencing use of PhotoDNA:
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-115shrg31316/html/CHRG-115shrg31316.htm

Journalism indicating use of PhotoDNA to detect extremism:
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/06/a-tool-to-delete-beheading-videos-before-they-even-appear-online/488105/
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/when-hatred-goes-viral-inside-social-medias-efforts-to-combat-terrorism/

Wikipedia pages:
PhotoDNA https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PhotoDNA
Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Internet_Forum_to_Counter_Terrorism

#FediPact #FediblockMeta #DefederateMeta #Meta #Facebook #Threads #FacebookFediverse #PhotoDNA #Surveillance

Fediverse friends @alexis and @jo have documented the presence of vile fascist kill-list compiler accounts Moms for Liberty, Libs of Tiktok, Gays Against Groomers and PragerU on Threads. In the attached screenshot, Jo is dogpiled for harassment.

There will be many, many more like them. These accounts won't be banned from Threads, because they produce engagement. And engagement - of any kind, the more negative the better - is all the psychopaths who run Meta care about.

Now we see exactly what we're being pulled into. Facebook hasn't launched a big Mastodon. Instead, the fediverse instances that federate with it will become little Facebooks

Receipts:
https://blahaj.zone/notes/9gu7nefip0
https://alexisart.me/@alexis/110665196652161520 (paste this link into search box)

#FediPact #FediblockMeta #DefederateMeta #Meta #Threads #schism #FediSchism

@mybarkingdogs
Agree. The problem here is that there is not really a middle ground, not with this corporation. This isn't Mozilla or Medium setting up their own little instance. And your reference to centrists does indeed invite parallels with the problem of fascism and antifascism. There are times when you must draw a line, this is one of them

No, Mark Zuckerberg won't meet you in the lobby Chris Trottier.

Recently one of the fediverse's most ardent proponents of collaboration with Meta produced a long thread in which he details his argument for embracing the P92 gambit with open arms. This post is a response.

If you're wondering why he is not tagged or addressed directly in his thread, that's because Chris is want to block anyone who offers up even the most polite of substantive counterpoints. We'll just toodle along over here thanks. The intent is not actually to debate him, but to provide food for thought to those who might have been persuaded by his relentless advocacy to federate.

The original thread is here: https://atomicpoet.org/notice/AX9zOBSSW6gg06h9t2

Trottier seems to believe that ActivityPub possesses extraordinary powers: "ActivityPub means that whatever of Meta’s userbase that’s exposed to federation will diversify into other platforms […] This diversification reduces the dependence of users on a single platform, giving them more choices and potentially drawing them away from Meta."

But he never acknowledges that Meta platforms comprise an algorithmically-governed censorship regime which repress information of many kinds - for example, the #joinpixelfed hashtag, which was banned on Instagram along with the Pixelfed account itself. Why would this entity allow pied pipers of the fediverse to frolic freely on P92 and evangelize escape from its enclosure?

For that matter, why does he think that would work at all? The userbase of Instagram will be prompted to join Threads. That means something of the existing network effect of that longstanding service will be transplanted in; and rest assured, there will be no account migration functionality provided.

In fact, the number of teen-dream travel-snap influencers who will, upon exposure to a single post by Chris Trottier on the magic of W3C protocol development, leap to wrench themselves away from the highly addictive and even financially-incentivized dependency on their established social graph and plunge themselves into the X11-Wayland religious war waged among the beloved catgirls of the fediverse is statistically very close to zero.

There is also an unsettling absence of agency in Chris's characterization of the lost souls of Meta, as if they're just sheep waiting for the good shepherds of decentralization to lead them to greener pastures. Instagram account holders are free to sign up for a fediverse account right now, and many have already done so - and by the way, the reverse flow is also quite possible for anyone here who wishes to connect to friends and family on Meta networks.

To open this "revelatory" "Pandora's Box" (his words) of the ActivityPub Rapture, Trottier proposes, with great bloviation, something called "lobby servers". As he describes: "Lobby servers can bridge communities. They act as intermediaries that connect different social media platforms, including Meta-owned ones, with non-Meta platforms. […] By federating with Meta, lobby servers can pull content from Meta’s network and redistribute it to other federated platforms. This syndication allows users on non-Meta platforms to access and engage with Meta users’ content, thereby exposing them to different perspectives and encouraging cross-platform interactions…"

The flowery language continues on, but he is not actually proposing some novel new technical development. There is nothing described which is not already part and parcel of ActivityPub federation. The "lobby server" is simply a rebrand of "an instance federating with Meta".

This Hotel California doublespeak is indicative of the most problematic aspects of the communications of pro-Meta luminaries. In a ploy more typical of the contemporary reactionary right, the values and intentions of the opposing fediverse opinions on Meta are inverted. Trottier's post begins: "Federation with Meta actually hurts Meta."

He continues, referencing the FediPact community: "… it’s not everyone’s objective to fight Meta, and there should be spaces where fighting Meta isn’t top of mind. Not everyone wants to be part and parcel of a fight, and that’s okay." So, in this new upside-down reality, the anticapitalists trying to save at least part of the fediverse from colonization by one of the most destructive corporations in the world "don't want to fight Meta"; the true revolutionaries are those eager to collaborate with that corporation.

The Orwellian trolling degenerates from there. He claims that turning away from P92 - a single vertical silo which may comprise tens or even hundreds of millions of users - will paradoxically harm decentralization, because all those little servers federated with each other somehow result in "fragmentation" instead. And the anarchists and marginalized communities in the FediPact? They're actually pro-police authoritarians! "To enforce total defederation will require whitelisting, and policing of that whitelist." The term "whitelist" is repeated over and over in this paragraph, which is a subtle dig in the direction of a general and very nasty propensity among pro-Zuck advocates to associate the FediPact with the "HOA" and the *absence* of diversity.

On the whole, the most visible proponents for Meta collaboration have been big-instance admins who have done neither themselves or their cause any good over the last couple of weeks. Chris Trottier is something of an exception. We have repeatedly noted people explaining that they were on the fence over the Meta issue, until convinced by Trottier's arguments. He may fancy himself as fighting Meta, but by relentlessly arguing in favor of federating with them, he is actually serving as their most useful and effective asset in the fediverse.

#DefederateMeta #FediblockMeta #FediPact #Meta #P92 #Threads

I personally feel sick about the Kolektiva situation. Couple of thoughts.

Whatever they did wrong, Kolektiva has provided a solidarity-space on the fediverse for those of the autonomous outlook, asking nothing in return (and not even bringing up donation requests very often). Thanks to them for that.

Questions remain about aspects of their opsec, in particular the use of unencrypted storage devices. Even a physically-seized drive may have held its secrets if it was encrypted at rest and not extracted onsite during the raid.

The timing of the announcement is also less than thrilling, though one assumes there are factors they can't discuss concerning this.

More broadly, this raises the issue of those of our philosophy eating their own dogfood. At first, the fact that anarchists claimed one of the larger instances on the fediverse as their own seemed to be a reason to wave the black flag. Yay, we're here.

But the Meta threat and this incident make clear that this approach has actually been in error. Kolektiva is a centralization - and it's also, frankly, not really horizontal.

Though it's not clear that this is the exact moment to do it, with P92 looming overhead, Kolektiva communards should perhaps consider breaking up into a more decentralized solidarity network on the fediverse, which would provide more resilience against technical failure, corporate enclosure, and state repression

#kolektiva

Hey there stranger! Welcome to Mastodon - Elon's not here!

#TwitterDown #TwitterMigration

@atomicpoet
Actually, what you and Evan have done today is work hard to convince everyone else that Meta is cool and good because they adopt "open standards". No one else cares about that right now. What we see are ActivityPub specialists who are well-positioned if the big boys adopt their specialization. What we don't see is the slightest concern for the fact that this community may about to be torn apart, or any of our very real worries about Meta's appropriation and predation of it. But go on and keep harping on about "open standards".

@atomicpoet
The problem with this boilerplate answer of yours is that it's an individualistic solution to a collective problem, like telling someone worried about global warming to go recycle. We're all in the fediverse together, so if you decide it's in the interests of your career to collaborate with Zuckerberg, everyone you federate with is also sucked into his surveillance machine

@atomicpoet
Some of us don't give a shit whether Meta "abide by open standards" or not. What we want is to have absolutely nothing to do with them

@atomicpoet @Jdreben @kidehen @smallpatatas
The leaked Barcelona promotion mentions "Mastodon compatibility", which has been interpreted as ActivityPub federation. If it doesn't mean that, then we can all breathe a big sigh of relief, but it certainly seems to.

Of course, no one outside of the corporation knows anything about the account migration question, but IMO there's a snowball's chance in hell of that. It's a business model of enclosure and extraction, rather than a new "fediverse app".

@atomicpoet
We'll have to see about the Tumblr thing. Wordpress hasn't exactly taken the fediverse by storm (yet). It's a plugin bolted on to a pre-existing CMS, I've seen users complain about its limited utility. The point is, the immediate issue is Meta, not these others. Tumblr could be a big deal/problem too. I want to see the fediverse thrive just like you, but a Zuckerberg takeover isn't the way to get there

@atomicpoet
Trolling? Not in the slightest. I've quite enjoyed our repartee, as I hope you have

@atomicpoet @FeralRobots
"Also, Google has not monopolized email. I don’t know why you believe that."

Every bounced email I get back from gmail while trying to communicate with a paying client brings me ever closer

@atomicpoet
But they're theoretical, Barcelona is definitely coming

@atomicpoet
And almost all of it owned and controlled by Mark Zuckerberg

@atomicpoet @FeralRobots
I know I don't have to remind you of embrace-extend-extinguish. In other news, I'm losing the ability to communicate with clients because emails from my own domain are being rejected by Gmail servers. Monopolists turn open protocols into closed ones