I keep seeing cries for defederation. do you people not understand the entire point of federation? dbzer0 doesn't allow direct links and thus is legal. the admin there is careful about following the law. there's no risk in federating with them. the guy running it was the guy running /r/piracy on reddit which remained open and okay.
though looking at your comment, is this a joke? satire? you stated that kbin.social should defederate with itself?
to clarify a bit. by default kbin focuses on /m/ "magazines" or subreddits. however /d/ lets you access the entire instance rather than just a single community.
@MxM111 /d/ is for "domains" or "instances". these are content from other websites. /m/ is kbin's equivalent to reddit's "subreddits" and are topical groups which may or may not be hosted on kbin.social.
@mofosyne kbin does have custom css styling for magazines, though the selectors are almost certainly different and incompatible with the reddit ones, so you'd have to rewrite it.
@luca just a heads up https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/ is a lemmy instance that is the official home of the /r/piracy community. they still don't allow direct links but appear to be much more open about things.
the magazines page seems to only pull up stuff that's already synced. so if it isn't synced you gotta use the search page instead. though I ran into an issue where sometimes even that doesn't work, or it'll pull up regular search results rather than the magazine. so not fool proof. but it helps a lot.
search for it using this: https://kbin.social/search and it should pop up. exclude the exclamation mark since that isn't used on kbin.
hello yes this showed up on kbin :)
they wanted it open lol
Agreed. Could you further clarify you stance above then, about kbin being federated all other instances?
Sure. I'm speaking in terms of content, culture, beliefs. by default, kbin should not defederate. Defederation is a severe action that should only be taken in extreme circumstances, such as extremely illegal things, or those which can directly lead to harm. For example, I'd be okay with defederating from an instance that's used to organize human trafficking. In an ideal I think that ultimately speech harms no one. drawings harm no one, and should be allowed in all cases; but it's understandable that such things may be illegal (in which case defederation is obviously needed to comply with law). In certain situations platforms may/can be used to cause real world harm, such as nonconsensual pornography, human trafficking, etc. in these cases, defederating I'd support to reduce the harm done to the real people effected. These aren't a matter of "oh no they offended me" but rather "perpetuating this content actively harms the subject".
Loli/Shota drawn artwork are drawings first and foremost, let's not forget that. They do not harm anyone and cannot harm anyone. In this sense, they should be allowed unless the law dictates otherwise.
When I say "kbin should be federated with all other instance" I mean: if I'm on kbin and wish to see certain content, or talk with certain people, I shouldn't have to worry about admins being offended or disgusted by such topics. The case of nonconsensual pornography is not a topic or genre it is not a form of speech it's a violation of consent. You can get identical content with proper consent. In that regard, cutting off such instances does not prevent people from enjoying the content they wish and speaking to those they wish.
I can appreciate avoiding the law for what could be described as "socially just" reasons. I just think that opening with that may unintentionally include harmful subjects, such as the ones you have listed above.
In practice, ethics and morality can often clash with the law. For instance, I think piracy is morally right and just, yet it is obviously illegal. In this case, while I would appreciate and support federation with instances that allow blatant piracy, it's understandable why defederation might be needed in that case. Similarly the reverse is true, some blatantly heinous content may be legal in certain areas (such as the scenario presented about nonconsensual pornography), in this case I do support going further than the law to protect the victims.
There's a difference between discussing murder, and planning murder. There's a difference between enjoying fictional murder scenarios, and allowing the sharing of photographs of your murder victims. Hopefully you can understand this?
maybe it's a satirical post?