site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of September 2, 2024

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

5
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I'll caveat first of all that I'm not sure federation is a solution (and, thus, that Matrix's bad implementation is the problem). A clever and correct federation protocol might be technically interesting (though I'm not entirely convinced it's even possible without trimming off a lot of the core criteria, but like a lot of structural efforts to solve governance problems, there's no guarantee that it's the right fix.

In the modern sphere, federation pushes to one of three local maxima:

  • Sites disagree about moderation remove each other from federation, leading to one large group of servers that have such a wide 'shared set of values' that the different servers mean little more than having rediscovered sharding badly, and a broader set of subgroups disconnected servers that are basically invisible to anyone not on them. At best, you might Zif yourself into a half-dozen clusters. See Mastodon's various blocklists for one example.
  • Sites agree about a moderation in all meaningful ways, which means that they've rediscovered sharding badly.
  • Sites disagree about moderation, but semi-federate, such as setting a distrusted server's users to whitelist only, or add varying opt-in requirements, running into the more general problem of 'mediated group hallucinated reality': some people in your sphere seem to be talking about things you can't see or touch.

Does the restriction of compliance tools such as photodna to major players act as regulatory capture against smaller players?

While PhotoDNA restricts its use to 'qualified customers', at least in theory relatively small outfits can apply and be recognized; RocketChat has a plugin based on the assumption that your individual outfit will enable it. The on-premise version does seem more restricted, though.

There are also a few other tools with at least different availability requirements, such as Cloudflare's implementation.

But I'm also not sure that on-server images (or video) is really that critical.

What is the future picture of interoperable messaging? Is it an email-like level of federation? EU has mandated interoperability but will it promote free speech or stamp it out? (anyone want an unhinged rant about "RCS"?)

I'm not sure I understand the advantages of a lot of the more complex proposed technologies, compared to something like an IRCv2 or even a much-more-rapid self-hosted or mail-list like RSS seem much more valuable -- improve the ability to read old messages or set some messages to specific channels, implement some sort of direct client-to-client file transfer capability a la wormhole, let the server operator optionally set some up-to-server capability, give 'rooms' a better interface and discoverability, give some basic protections for account creation, done.

But even if that were The Ideal Chat Form, a large part of the problem today is that Everything's Good Enough now. Discord, Matrix, RocketChat, and even a lot of lesser-known competitors are workable for communities currently using them, the costs of transition are vast, and new Western-culture communities aren't forming anywhere near the rate they were in the USENET, Eternal September, or early Smartphone era. If you build a better mousetrap, they will not beat a path to your door. They may not even hear about you.