• @maegul
    link
    English
    104 months ago

    My question is if there’s any legal mechanism to prevent this on other platforms? Pixelfed for example.

    Good question!

    I’ve been saying for a while that the fediverse is blind to this issue as everything here is completely scrapable through either the public web or by running federated servers. On top of that, being culturally inclined toward more “serious” conversation and providing content warnings and alt-text for images, we’re probably generating relatively valuable training data.

    And yet everything is public as though it’s still 2012.

    There are alternatives. BlueSky for instance is basically private to members only. They recently announced that content would be made public to the web and a number of users were upset.

    Group chats and Discord servers are probably similar, and from what I can tell “new” popular places for social activity online.

    A major issue the fediverse has, IMO, is that it’s kinda stuck trying to fight Twitter and Facebook circa 2012, when that battle was lost and we’re on to new battle fronts now.

    • Otter
      link
      fedilink
      English
      44 months ago

      Yea that’s something that’s been on my mind as well

      There are benefits from that openness and verifiability in public spaces (ex. Lemmy communities), since now it’s easier to determine if there’s vote manipulation or astroturfing. But I think the fediverse needs a lot of work around privacy, and also education about what is/isn’t private on these platforms.

      There should also be more of a focus on setting up a legal requirement on what can be done with the information, but I’m not sure if that’s a thing just yet. We developed GPLv3 to make sure FOSS products can’t be incorporated for profit, but I’m not sure how it would work for data.

      ex. It should be easy to save, record, and share posts on the fediverse, such as with embeds/screenshots/news stories

      But also we want to prevent abuse, misuse, and AI training

    • PupBiru
      link
      fedilink
      1
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      afaik activitypub/fediverse doesn’t have to be fully open… there’s private messages and followers only profiles on mastodon… sure, any server admins of your followed would be able to see anything you post (and thus in this case for threads for example, if you accept any follower from threads then meta can see your stuff) but this also doesn’t grant them a license to use the content

      also, bluesky will eventually be the same: it only doesn’t have those issues now because they haven’t opened up their software… it’ll have federation in the future, which means it has to be somewhat programmatically open to others

    • @Halcyon@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      14 months ago

      Bluesky being only accessible by members doesn’t completely prevent the content from being scraped by bots, though. Bots can be given user access in Bluesky too, and bots can read posts, create own posts and scrape posts and user profiles.

      • @maegul
        link
        English
        14 months ago

        My main point with BlueSky was that many of the users there had gotten quite comfortable with what appeared to be their closed/private space, which, despite examples like yours, was relatively true compared to the norms of Twitter and Mastodon.

        The point was that many over there seemed to like it, and, if a BlueSky competitor opened up today promising all the same stuff but closed/private with the ability to opt out and make something public, many would probably jump ship or demand the same from BlueSky.