"The problem is that it is the presence of ICE itself that is already causing the harm. The intimidation of ‘we are here, you cannot escape us’ is the point, and the accounts by the regime are deliberately trying to provoke an outrage." connectedplaces.online/reports…
On some level, I think this is correct, but I also wonder if the administration isn't also daring the Bluesky LLC to ban them, so that they can justify a more hostile stance toward the network.
#politics #USPol #Bluesky
Bluesky built a verification system designed to distribute trust, and then didn't use it when it mattered.
connectedplaces.online
⁂ L. Rhodes
in reply to ⁂ L. Rhodes • • •Sensitive content
⁂ L. Rhodes
in reply to ⁂ L. Rhodes • • •Sensitive content
全知全能大先生
in reply to ⁂ L. Rhodes • • •⁂ L. Rhodes
in reply to 全知全能大先生 • • •Mastodon forms new U.S. non-profit
Mastodon BlogJohn
in reply to ⁂ L. Rhodes • • •Sensitive content
I would be skeptical of any analysis of Trump's government that pivots on them "needing" justification. I don't think that's an apt read of their priorities or their strategy.
Trump discarded legitimacy a long time ago; at this point, he's simply engaging in terror tactics to try and get people to hide in their homes. But it's having the opposite effect, and he and his goons literally don't know what to do.
They are going to lose, badly.
⁂ L. Rhodes
in reply to John • • •Sensitive content
@johnzajac But they do seek justification, constantly. Look at the buildup to the kidnapping of Maduro. They spent months pretending that military action was a rational and permissible response to unproven accusations of a state-operated drug smuggling operation. And after the death of Rachel Good, they quickly mobilized to argue and (unpersuasively) demonstrate that the use of deadly force was justified by Good's actions.
They do, in some cases, take a "apologies not permission" approach, but it's notable that they continue to manufacture justification for a broad range of behaviors where we might otherwise assume they're being the point of needing justifications.
John
in reply to ⁂ L. Rhodes • • •Sensitive content
With MAGA, the governing part of government is uninterested; they are the manifestation of the image becoming the thing becoming the image, a la "ceci n'est-ce pas une pipe". Basically, MAGA thinks the image is the thing.
That's how they see power: a projection. IT's how they see other people: hollow and empty blood sacs. It's not murder if all you're killing is an aesthetic.
Their "justification" isn't seeking legitimacy...
⁂ L. Rhodes
in reply to John • • •Sensitive content
⁂ L. Rhodes
Unknown parent • • •@zotheca I don't think that is misinformation, but it does require a somewhat nuanced understanding of the ATProto network. You can migrate an account away from the Bluesky PDS, but all traffic on the Bluesky network moves their a Relay and Appview that Bluesky owns and operates. If you want to communicate with anyone on that network, you have to operate on those two big points of centralization.
There are efforts to build parallel networks using ATProto, most notably Blacksky and Northsky, and as far as I know they've made some progress toward standing up their own relays and appviews, but if you want to communicate from those networks to accounts on the Bluesky network, you're still dependent on infrastructure that Bluesky itself owns and operates. The protocol is simply structured to push all traffic through big, expensive bottlenecks.
zotheca
Unknown parent • • •Sensitive content
@mastodonmigration@mastodon.online
> They pretend that people can leave, but there is nowhere to go, so such accounts have much more leverage.
That's misinformation. You're doing PR at the expense of the truth. That's why I'm blocking you. The reality was more that you could migrate away from Bluesky, but not back again.
Propaganda and PR lies make the Fediverse extremely unattractive.
@lrhodes
Mastodon Migration
Unknown parent • • •Sensitive content
@zotheca
Not sure what you are saying. Anyone can spin up a Mastodon instance, and they can host and verify anyone they want.
It is then up to other instances as to whether to federate with them.
What L. Rhodes is correctly asserting is that the network would take swift action to defederate from any instance hosting such an account. It does not rely on some central authority to make such decisions. As it should be.
1/2
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Sensitive content
@zotheca
In the case of #Bluesky, because they are actually not a federated network, and retain centralized control, they are responsible for all the accounts on the network. They pretend that people can leave, but there is nowhere to go, so such accounts have much more leverage. They can, in effect, dare Bsky to ban them and then go after them if they do.
2/2
⁂ L. Rhodes
Unknown parent • • •Sensitive content
@zotheca If Mastodon could intervene in the case of ICE verification, then they could also intervene to prevent the verification of, say, the UN, or LGBTQ rights groups, or Palestinian relief orgs, or any number of groups who are doing positive work rather than oppressive policing.
I'd say that Mastodon has an ethical obligation to avoid building harm into its software, but I wouldn't say they have a responsibility to prevent all possible harms, anymore than I would say that a tool manufacturer has a responsibility to intervene in the case of every possible ax murderer.
⁂ L. Rhodes
Unknown parent • • •@zotheca Blacksky operates its own infrastructure, but PDS on its network are still connecting to the Bluesky relay in order to pass messages to Bluesky users, who make up the bulk of their shared network.
(I also have doubts about the sustainability of Blacksky's Relay and Appviews. Per Rudy, the appview currently holds several terabytes of data, and that number will only grow the longer it operates. That's going to require a rather large source of revenue to maintain, and AFAIK, Blacksky doesn't have the sort of venture capitalist backing that Bluesky does.)