this post was submitted on 18 Jun 2023
619 points (99.0% liked)

Lemmy.World Announcements

28381 readers
2 users here now

This Community is intended for posts about the Lemmy.world server by the admins.

Follow us for server news 🐘

Outages πŸ”₯

https://status.lemmy.world

For support with issues at Lemmy.world, go to the Lemmy.world Support community.

Support e-mail

Any support requests are best sent to [email protected] e-mail.

Report contact

Donations πŸ’—

If you would like to make a donation to support the cost of running this platform, please do so at the following donation URLs.

If you can, please use / switch to Ko-Fi, it has the lowest fees for us

Ko-Fi (Donate)

Bunq (Donate)

Open Collective backers and sponsors

Patreon

Join the team

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I've never thought of something being CEO-proof, but you're not wrong. Those CEO's did shit the bed in the most diarrhea way possible.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

One day the lemmy could just go closed source and sell to a company.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Protocol is open, anyone can rewrite a federation client that pulls data off proprietary servers as a last resort. This is why federation is great. Besides, you can't close an open source project, you have to create new, closed parts to have them. That's how mariadb and galera took a chunk off mysql user base and how libreoffice became a successor of openoffice.

As a side note, I wish we could move accounts and even communities between instances, based on some kind of two way handshake agreement.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Right? Currently if an instance fails then all the communities hosted on that instance and comments are essentially 'gone' correct?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No it isn't. A company can be formed to be the steward of either or both the Lemmy source code or popular instances, which would be run by a CEO. I bet anything these corporate structures naturally form as people try to monetize the community and seek investment to gain control over the ecosystem.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The hurdle to that is much greater here since there's a common protocol adopted by multiple open source projects (of which Lemmy) which allows interoperability. If a profit-driven group would try to capture it, people could move instances/use a fork/use a different but similar activitypub project like kbin, etc.

At least I think that's correct? It seems to me there are multiple lines of defense which each have a good amount of redundancy.

[–] Phileosopher 1 points 1 year ago

That's not entirely true. Plenty of FLOSS software exist that are also run by corporations.

The secret is that corporate FLOSS maintainers are "service providers" and make their living that way, but the code is a public-access creative output that allows others to render that service.

It's a somewhat implicit contract of saying "Live and let live, since I'm technically have more power strictly because I designed the darn thing." Sorta scratches the ego and also allows freedom for everyone else at the same time.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

You’re posting this on lemmy.world. The owner of this instance, the biggest new instance, is literally building out a business of instance hosting. If this goes well, and his business grows, it will have chief executives.

You could also totally monetize hosting and build a business around that. There are already several private projects to build lemmy clients.

With federated sites you won’t have one CEO. If it takes off, we’ll have many CEOs. Trust me.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

We do have a term for that, it's a little bit of a trigger-word for certain demographics, but the correct term is socialism.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The largest (at least well funded) socialist organization in the world is the US military...

If everyone got the shit I got as a disabled vet, we'd all be a lot better off and the only negative would be rich people have a slightly lower high score that's 100% irrelevant to how their quality of life is.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

TL;DR: Yeah, I 100% agree, if everyone had a strong safety net, we'd be much better off.

When it works it works. I mean I have met several people who've expressed a lot of sincere dissatisfaction with the VA's medical services, including limited access to mental healthcare among other things. Particularly of concern is the high degree of veterans who end up on the street--many with severe mental health issues, with some even self-medicating and/or dealing with addictions.

Of course, I'm sure there are more factors that contribute to homeless veterans than limited accessibility to medical care, mental healthcare, and other social services provided by the VA--but it is important to consider.

..and of course, as you are aware, it's better to have those social systems in-place than nothing at all. Even when run to a degree of mediocrity, socialist programs can and do tend to benefit a population. While not everyone may like the Supplemental Security Income and FAFSA programs: without them, I wouldn't be able to attend a university as a future job-seeking student.

Specifically without SSI, many who are unable to pursue a degree would end up homeless and hungry, becoming a greater burden on society. In my opinion, it's unfortunate that you have to have a disability in order to qualify for this safety-net program; as I know several people who turned to less favorable means of providing for themselves, because they were rock-bottom and didn't qualify for any programs.

So, yeah, the VA program, and many other programs in the US are great examples of both some of the harms, but also the significant positive benefits that socialist policies can have for a population. Indeed, the greatest harms done by socialist programs in the US seem to be caused by their limitations and inability to properly serve enough people. Providing a everyone access to a solid safety net would do wonders for us as a society and for our economy.

[–] Phileosopher 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The trouble with socialism, though, is that any implementation of it strips away meaning in the process of trying to help people.

Meaning comes from a person feeling responsibility for what they do. That responsibility requires exposure to risk if they don't act.

Almost any policy created to help people without a well-guarded limit will quickly become paternalism and, consequently, strip away meaning.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Phileosopher 1 points 1 year ago

Can you define "socialism"? I'm a little lost on how any social media with a hosting provider or moderator can ever be socialism.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

From empirical evidence we learned that no way in socialism we can enjoy this kind of freedom of expression.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not true. Email is basically owned by like five companies today. They just block every new host that tries to come up

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: β€Ή prev next β€Ί