190

Official Statement from Lemmy.world admin about community removal (alexandrite.app)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by moeka89@lemm.ee to c/piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com

115 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Ugetsu@feddit.de 27 points 1 year ago

That´s one thing I GENUINELY can´t wrap my head around with lemmy in general. How is it, that the admins of one lemmy instance feel responsible for what gets posted in a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT instance to the point they feel the need to keep their own members from even seeing it? It doesn´t reflect negatively on firefox, that they allow me to access piracy sites. It doesn´t reflect negatively on gmail that they allow me to use their email address to subscribe to piracy stuff. Why would it reflect negatively on lemmy.world, if their members also accessed piracy stuff? Are the admins of lemmy.world somehow responsible for what their members do, even if it´s not on their own instance?

[-] llii@feddit.de 38 points 1 year ago

Because the content their users subscribe to gets copied to the lemmy.world servers. At this moment they host these posts.

[-] AAA@feddit.de 17 points 1 year ago

Are the admins of lemmy.world somehow responsible for what their members do, even if it´s not on their own instance?

They are not responsible for what their users do, but for what is saved on their instance. And by any lemmy.world user interacting with content from a different instance, their lemmy.world will host a copy of that content. That's how lemmy works.

So if a lemmy.world user subscribes to a pirate sub, that whole subs content is now mirrored on lemmy.world.

Not just related to piracy that's a huge liability issue for admins.

[-] Ugetsu@feddit.de 9 points 1 year ago

Oh boy, I didn´t know that. What´s the reason of doing it that way though? I mean, since I discovered lemmy, most if not all drama related to lemmy being a good platform came down to the fact that certain instances blocked certain other instances OR even to the question why an instance DIDN´T block another instace that had some right wing shit on it. Seems to me, having your instance simply copy over everything might be more of a liability at this point.

[-] AAA@feddit.de 9 points 1 year ago

Well I don't know why it's being done like this, but my informed guess would be:

Resilience. If the content wouldn't be copied, defederating/blocking an instance would mean that the content you created there (topics, comments, etc) would be lost to you. So if you wrote a nice comment, or saved a bunch of topics for later, and then your instance blocks the other instance... that would be gone for you. With the copy this doesn't happen.

Performance. Instead of having to deal with every user (from a different instance) individually, your instance only has to deal with other instances. With this updates between each other can be sent in larger chunks (and definitely with less network connections). Additional benefit: smaller instances don't get knocked down by user-heavy instances when they host a popular community.

Just guesses tho.

All social media is a liability time bomb unfortunately. That's why only the biggest players can afford it so far.

[-] SchizoDenji@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

But piracy instances aren't hosting the pirated content either. It's hosted on seperate servers and it is only linked AFAIK.

[-] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago

Yeah I think the reasoning is stupid in this particular case. But there are good reasons to defederate from instances due to the content they allow in some cases.