@JPEG Hope you don’t reconsider Mast being open source because of them! If they want to fork, let them. We’ll see which fork is better 😉.
BTW, did I misunderstand or is it still possible to use Gab, just not possible to sign up? In which case I would say they’re not blocked and merely discouraged and are making a fool of themselves for nothing. You can always sign up on Web!
I’m personally not a fan of filtering in software instead of at the backend, but it’s your app 🙂.
@JPEG Ah. That I’m not a fan of. Not because I like Gab, but it makes me wonder if e.g. my instance ever gets blocked because you and @angristan get into an argument or whatever. Software should let me do what I want to do. It’s ok to have defaults that I need to change, it’s ok to block sign up as that’s kind of an endorsement, but I’m worried about software that enforces opinions and gets in my way :/. Gab is an easy one, but what’s next?
@js @angristan That’s entirely understandable and a very valid point. I think the distinction here is between what’s widely regarded as hate speech and ‘nazis’ etc. That’s wholeheartedly considered ‘bad’. I would never stop anyone using the platform for personal preferences or reasons otherwise that don’t cause any harm on others.
@JPEG That's good to hear! 🙂
But there's a few other problems as well, even with the Gab ban. I've learned early (~ 2003 or so) that using software to fix social problems doesn't work and only makes everything worse.
Then there's that open source licenses explicitly don't limit how it can be used. I'd like to not allow any military to use my software - but then it would not be open source anymore, so I do not have such a clause. Things would quickly get incompatible and the software [1/n]
@JPEG ecosystem would collapse, as you quickly have a lot of incompatible licenses. *Everybody* is now trying to limit who can use their software. Now imagine someone like ESR would start enforcing his political opinions on the software he maintains. I'm sure he has plenty of opinions you personally disagree with, and if he limits the software to people who agree with him, you would no longer be able to use it. Suddenly, you would have a huge problem: No fetchmail. No ncurses. So even [2/n]
@JPEG though you disagree with his political opinions, you might still want to use the software. Now imagine the mess we'd be in if everybody would enforce their political opinion in their software.
And then there's also the point that you might want to use Gab. Not because you are a Nazi. Because you are a target and want to know what they are up to. You might want to use Mast to read up on what they are targeting right now, so that you can adjust and stay out of it.
@JPEG politics in software has been tried before, and it never worked well. Even such mundane things as a "Do no evil" clause resulted in a big problem, even though they seem completely harmless and well intentioned.
Imagine that next Mozilla prevents you from visiting some sites they disagree with. "You want to use Google? They track you. We disagree with that."
In any case, feel free to disagree 🙂. Just my opinion and experience and I force it on nobody 😉. And also not a fan of Gab.
@js I respect and agree with all the points that you've mentioned. It's definitely a hard balance to find, where you respect users' wishes as well as what's 'right'. Policing the state of a network tends to have a negative effect, but without it, it tends to fester anyway so kind of need a balance either way. Take Twitter for example, Jack's hated by many for how he's allowing Nazis on his platform, but if were to start banning entire groups of people, it would set a precedent that could lead...
@js to it becoming a very closed community. It's not something that's as clear as black and white, and I'd love to satisfy both ends of this. But also, having already taken a step, I feel like I can't take any steps back now at all. Gab is bad, that we agree on, but what else is bad, and how much else will have to be decided? Questions I don't really want to partake in...
@js because at the end of the day I just wanted to make a cool app that people can use. Realistically, the platform decisions should fall on platform creators, not front-end vendors. I didn't even know what gab was until some time ago, and even then it's not something I have come across myself. It's a weird scenario but I agree with all you've said. :)
@JPEG Interesting counter argument to consider: We made a lot of nazis super rich by banning them from all payment methods and pushing them to Bitcoin 😟
As soon as you have different licenses with incompatible terms, you have a problem. Example: If someone uses the BSD license and adds "Can't be used by Germans" (using that as an example as I am German), and someone else adds a "Can only be used by Germans", then those two can never be combined.
As you can see, not an FSF problem.
@VyrCossont Exactly - we already have license problems because there's so many. Now if everybody adds their own clause on usage restrictions, there's basically almost no compatibility left anymore.
And yes, you do use ESR's software. You have it on your system. You're using it daily. I'm sure. I mean, do you use e-mail? Do you use anything with ncurses? There you go. I intentionally picked ESR *because* he is objectionable and yet everybody uses his software.
@VyrCossont I'm thinking putting a line that says "Any military is not allowed to use this software" is only causing fragmentation, because a military won't care anyway about such a clause. So you get fragmentation and the software is still used by the military. I definitely don't want my software to be used to kill people, but there's only so much I can do.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!