zalack

It happens, but it's not pervasive. There's nothing wrong with sexual imagery in a vacuum.

The issue for women is the sheer avalanche of bullshit. Images of half naked women with unrealistic bodies are EVERYWHERE. Billboards, magazine covers, commercials, etc.

I'm gonna need some receipts for that one, mostly because as an end user the content quality on that sub is head and shoulders better than anywhere else on Reddit

Also, like, that kinda weird shit is going to happen occasionally anywhere there are power heiarchies. It sucks when it happens to you, but it's unavoidable when a group of humans is given a set of rules to enforce.

AskHistorians may be my favorite corner of the Internet ever. What a great sub and mod team.

I'm okay with a small bubble of randos as my Fediverse, I don't need -- or want -- my social media to be "everybody".

I'm in a discord with my friends and that's pretty much all I need.

Sure, but having the legal standing in the first place is a good idea.

And secondly, if the licensing is done on individual posts and owned by the user, systematic disregard for that seems like it would be good grounds for a class action, which can be incredibly lucrative, and therefore attractive, to large law firms.

I posted a version of this in another thread:

I really think Lemmy, Kbin, and Mastodon need to figure out a way to have a default terms of service that ships with their product which forbids using the API to collect data for anything outside of user-facing social network interfaces, including account association heuristics and similar processes.

A way for users to set licenses on individual posts would be huge as well, with a default license instance admins can set.

That way for-profit instances could be forced to filter out posts with licenses that do not allow for-profit use. Honestly, even just a simple check mark "[ ] allow for-profit republication", and have two licenses that can be attached: one that allows for-profit use and one that does not.

The fediverse should start baking in data control into it's legal framework. Want to federate with Mastodon? You need to follow the ToS for what you can do with its posts. If we wanted to get really extreme we could even say the license should be copy-left. Any instance that wants to federate with a non-profit instances needs to also be non-profit.

That could block for-profit companies from becoming part of the network in the first place, even by use of stealth relay instances.

#threads

... was he authorized to do that?

I really think Lemmy, Kbin, and Mastodon need to figure out a way to have a default terms of service that ship with their product which forbids using the API to collect data for commercial purposes.

Additionally, there should be a way for users to indicate licensing for individual posts, with a default license instance admins can set.

That way for-profit instances could be forced to filter out posts with licenses that do not allow for-profit use. Honestly, even just a simple check mark "[ ] allow for-profit republication", and have two licenses that can be attached: one that allows for-profit use and one that does not.

Kbin generally seems to churn faster than Reddit for me, but posts on Lemmy do seem to stay around for a awhile.

I think it would be interesting to explore an API affordance for attaching licenses to fediverse content, with the admins being able to set a default license for their server.

So if Meta wants to get content from the fediverse, it has to check the headers of each post and make sure it's licensed for commercial use.