Follow

New blogpost "there is no taking back your words on the fediverse".

On why KISS is a security and privacy feature. (and why flockingbird does not plan to add feature X)

fediverse.blog/~/Flockingbird/

@flockingbird isn't the fact that Your Community == a separate instance, a bit of a high barrier?

I can imagine that almost every user wants to have control over what their Community consists of. This means spinning up a server, doing the admin, etc. I think I'd like my Community to be my Rolodex.

There's as:Group to model that.

In any case, I wrote a #FediverseFutures post to think about Community concepts..

socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/

#YearOfTheFediverse

@flockingbird > Centralised social media makes “deleting” a little easier

In theory ;) They make "hiding from view" easy. They don't actually delete anything from their databases - lots of evidence of that has popped up in the wild.

Now, a Fedi server of your own. And two people on this same server, exchanging messages in limited-view chat.
If they also admin the node, why deprive them of a possibility to delete something once it's irrelevant?

@flockingbird

> once shared, you should consider it public-ish

YES. And yet, security is not about a silver bullet. It's about small incremental steps. What's a bit more secure? And a bit more? We can assume that everything shared online is public. But sharing it in a limited fashion is a bit better. Encrypting - even better. Etc.

Having said that, I think your network is kind of all-public by design. So perhaps it makes sense in this special case. 🤔

@lightone We intent to be "all public" for anything set to "public".

Yet allow "private" to on-instance and to "only me". Only-me, just means the data is hidden for anyone but yourself. Useful for notes, tags or contact details.

"On-instance" is for data that is sensitive, but allowed to be shared with others. It can only leave the instance if fellow community-members copy/screenshot and share it (which is intentional and malicious).

We believe this fits the "trust you local peers" best.

@lightone If my message was received as "we should not have delete, because it doesn't work in these and these cases", I communicated it wrong. Sorry.

Of course being able to "delete" is better than not having that feature. But even better would be when it is entirely clear that message stayed on-server and will be truly deleted versus "just a suggestion for the other server".

The UX and the function could make that clear. KISS helps here too.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Fosstodon

Fosstodon is an English speaking Mastodon instance that is open to anyone who is interested in technology; particularly free & open source software.