Post AnymD5fEHno6C5P3h2 by tiago@social.skewed.de
(DIR) More posts by tiago@social.skewed.de
(DIR) Post #AnyGdg9Y2w4SMIDdxY by tiago@social.skewed.de
2024-11-12T15:44:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Mastodon developers should reflect why this is happening over at Bluesky and not over here... Despite the initial advantage that Mastodon had.They won't reflect or care enough to look past their ideological zeal. But they really should.https://fediscience.org/users/UlrikeHahn/statuses/113468988673812925
(DIR) Post #AnyHoIywdUC1dOtG6a by ide@masto.ai
2024-11-12T15:57:55Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@tiago What would you figure is the cause?
(DIR) Post #AnyLVAoHC96obV26Xg by tiago@social.skewed.de
2024-11-12T16:39:18Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@vbuendiar @ide Mastodon provides an inferior interface by design. The ideology behind it dictates that quotes are inherently toxic, algorithmic timelines promote misinformation, etc. So they choose to disable all of these things, instead of letting users choose what they want. This paternalistic attitude eventually drives people away.
(DIR) Post #AnyPUS5NsTCni9wkBU by tiago@social.skewed.de
2024-11-12T17:24:00Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@vbuendiar @ide I don't take these studies seriously at all. It's almost impossible to remove all the relevant confounders.Also, I doubt that any “state-of-the-art toxicity detection tool“ does anything meaningful.In the meantime, while we debate this. people will just use a platform that allows them to do what they please.
(DIR) Post #AnyQ7k1j6hhyeEyDgW by tiago@social.skewed.de
2024-11-12T17:31:05Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@vbuendiar @ide Of course it's paternalistic!“You are not allowed to quote a tweet because it in principle can be used to abuse someone, even though this is not at all what you planned to do.”The idea that something like quoting (i.e. *linking*) can be considered a “safety” issue is frankly insane.This kind of babysitting mentality is unsustainable, and is large part of what is holding this platform back.
(DIR) Post #AnyUTAMWmrZWDxAhCi by tiago@social.skewed.de
2024-11-12T18:19:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@vbuendiar @ide In order for something to be forbidden there needs to be overwhelming evidence that the harm outweighs the benefits. Importantly, the burden of proof lies on those that want to impose the ban!If in doubt, there should be no restrictions. At least if you don't want to live in an authoritarian society.We don't ban kitchen knives even though the causal connection to murder is pretty clear — incomparably so to quotes and timeline algorithms — and the harm caused is much higher.Doing “harm” in social media — i.e. insulting someone — is a choice. Forcing people who do not make that choice not to use some posting feature is pretty much the definition of paternalism, i.e. removing people's agency and capacity do decide from themselves.
(DIR) Post #AnyWhsL8HCQQa2f10a by tiago@social.skewed.de
2024-11-12T18:44:51Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@UlrikeHahn @vbuendiar @ide This such a misleading analogy!Mastodon is intended as a public platform, for the public good, not a personal, private enclave.You use the same argument as Elon Musk: it's my property and I do what I want.
(DIR) Post #AnyXopuNoZkj1L21yK by tiago@social.skewed.de
2024-11-12T18:57:19Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@UlrikeHahn @vbuendiar @ide In case you haven't noticed, I'm arguing why I disagree with their decision.To the extent they want to claim their restrictive decisions are in the public good, the burden of proof lies on them, of course.You can't have your cake and eat it.
(DIR) Post #AnyYGH80iiMFGBUQs4 by tiago@social.skewed.de
2024-11-12T19:02:18Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@UlrikeHahn @vbuendiar @ide BTW, believing something is in the public good, by itself, means nothing.Musk believes what he does is for the public good.Any murderous dictator believes he's acting for the public good.Proving, arguing coherently, in a princied way, convincing others, etc. That's the meaningful bit.
(DIR) Post #AnyZwCoJGPVjz9pgoa by tiago@social.skewed.de
2024-11-12T19:21:03Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@UlrikeHahn @vbuendiar @ide “Here's my scholarly argument why claims do not have to be susbstantiated.” Amazing.Only on this platform....
(DIR) Post #AnyeAhyIbUp0V6fyQC by tiago@social.skewed.de
2024-11-12T20:08:30Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@UlrikeHahn @vbuendiar @ide You insist on misunderstanding my argument.Primarily, I'm saying that in the ABSENCE of evidence that supports a constraint on someone's freedom of action, that constraint is not justified.The burden of proof lies on who wants to impose control.This argument is mainly moral: power needs to be justified.Additionally, the proposition that quotes cause harm needs evidence because it's fundamentally an empirical claim. No one explains *why* that should be true, they only claim that it is so. The absence of evidence for an empirical claim means it's not a valid claim. The burden lies on providing evidence for it, not against it. No one has to prove that unicorns don't exist.
(DIR) Post #Anyfmb5AlX5m5oWPRI by tiago@social.skewed.de
2024-11-12T20:26:33Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@vbuendiar @UlrikeHahn Quotes and timelines have obvious good uses. That's why they were implemented in the first place.Quotes have been in the roadmap for *years* now, even though they are essentially the most elementary aspect of the web: hyperlinks. They are taking long to implement them because they havent figured out how to make it so contrived that it will be basically useless.The official app argument is a red herring. I run my own instance with a forked version that actually allows quotes—after all they're trivial to implement. But if I quote a post it will not show correctly for you, since you're using the official version. So it's about what the majority is using.
(DIR) Post #AnyfrVjm4ACWxlr7vk by felwert@fedihum.org
2024-11-12T20:27:25Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@tiago First, they have long revised their strict view on quote posts, they just didn't get around implementing it yet, so you're fighting a straw man. And second, it's really a weird view that not implementing a feature is limiting anyone's freedom. They also didn't implement a button that sprinkles unicorns across my screen, and I don't complain that's limiting my freedom to have an abundance of unicorns. (I have a feeling you won't like the analogy either.) @UlrikeHahn @vbuendiar @ide
(DIR) Post #AnygTGBKLkcziqkAka by tiago@social.skewed.de
2024-11-12T20:34:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@felwert @UlrikeHahn @vbuendiar @ide This is such an intellectually dishonest argument. Displaying an inline link is not only natural but is also expected behavior, since every single microblogging platform *except* mastodon supports it. They went out of the way to not implement it.The fact that the quotes are in the roadmad for years essentially proves my point that they don't have any goood evidence against them (yet, somehow, someone will always jump in the defense of the lack of quotes when you point out it's a bad idea). But it's not a strawman in any way, it's a such a clear deficiency that even the authors of the platform admit it!
(DIR) Post #AnyganGnj7UQN3tdcO by tillgrallert@digitalcourage.social
2024-11-12T20:33:32Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@felwert @tiago @UlrikeHahn @vbuendiar @ide not having this fantastic unicorn-button suddenly feels as if I am unduly constrained in my freedom of expression. Let’s fight for the unicorns!
(DIR) Post #AnygaoFQ5jylP4G36W by tillgrallert@digitalcourage.social
2024-11-12T20:34:14Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@felwert @tiago @UlrikeHahn @vbuendiar @ide oh and btw plenty of clients have implemented some form of quote toots
(DIR) Post #Anygap2h8XOVrtJOuO by tiago@social.skewed.de
2024-11-12T20:35:37Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@tillgrallert @felwert @UlrikeHahn @vbuendiar @ide Yes, but the quotes don't display correctly for the vast majority of users.
(DIR) Post #Anyh0aY7e0RWRpIY76 by felwert@fedihum.org
2024-11-12T20:40:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@tiago You don't do less than "intellectually dishonest", do you? Big gun for a simple disagreement. And there's much more to quote posts than rendering an inline link preview. @UlrikeHahn @vbuendiar @ide
(DIR) Post #AnyhnzhEw8iWd67a4m by tiago@social.skewed.de
2024-11-12T20:49:14Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@felwert @UlrikeHahn @vbuendiar @ide I really don't believe you are being honest when you compare quotes with unicorn buttons. Sorry for the precision, but you know I'm right.Quotes are essentially inline previews of other posts.There are additional functionalities, like being notified, but they are not essential.
(DIR) Post #AnyhxeauFUZA4ulTrk by tiago@social.skewed.de
2024-11-12T20:50:59Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@vasto @vbuendiar @ide Completely agree. This is, above all, an inspid place. A nanny social network.
(DIR) Post #AnyiKLI6BUXKs1mpOK by felwert@fedihum.org
2024-11-12T20:55:03Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@tiago They are, and you know I'm right. Sorry for the precision. 🤷 @UlrikeHahn @vbuendiar @ide
(DIR) Post #AnyjxmSrBgxKOaBinA by tiago@social.skewed.de
2024-11-12T21:13:25Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@vasto @vbuendiar @ide The fediverse is a great idea. But mastodon was a mistake.
(DIR) Post #AnyluGUDpAaiG0HI12 by tiago@social.skewed.de
2024-11-12T21:35:10Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@UlrikeHahn @felwert @vbuendiar @ide Completely abusurd. Nowhere I claimed or implied they should be *compelled* to do anything. My discourse is anti-authoritatian, if you haven't noticed.I'm arguing why they *should* do something, not only because it would lead to a better outcome, but it would also be more consistent with their allegded goals and principles.I'm criticizing, not calling the police.You're using a double standard: to defend their decisions you evoke the common good, to defend against criticisms you evoke their right to do what they please, regardless of consistency, or what others think. You can't have both ways.
(DIR) Post #AnymD5fEHno6C5P3h2 by tiago@social.skewed.de
2024-11-12T21:38:35Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@vasto @vbuendiar @ide Eventually free software finds a way. But the missed uportunity won't come back.
(DIR) Post #AnyqNJteckCv33HdvE by tiago@social.skewed.de
2024-11-12T22:25:13Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@UlrikeHahn @felwert @vbuendiar @ide I don't remember a single interchange with you that has "worked" or was productive in any way.In any case, I have given plenty of reasons as to why this platform should be changed, either by the original developers of by others:1. There's no evidence that the excessively restrictive measures help.2. There are plenty of examples where the restrictions hinder meaningful interactions.3. It drives people away, demonstrably.The idea that everything hinges on my proving that the lack of restrictions are not harmful in any way (i.e. proving a negative) is just something you have invented and are obsessed with.