Bridgy should be opt-out because not enough people are opting in is just THE most hilarious thing, keep going, you're too funny.
-
Oliphantom Menacereplied to Oliphantom Menace last edited by
Yes, you'll get fewer takers with opt-in than with opt-out.
But you know what you'll also get?
Informed, enthusiastic consent.
-
Oliphantom Menacereplied to Oliphantom Menace last edited by
We'd love to send all your data to AI, but there's this privacy thing. Wait a minute, I've got the answer! I've just decided you were already consenting to send your data! We've assumed your permission, because that's consent!
-
Oliphantom Menacereplied to Oliphantom Menace last edited by
"Did you get consent?"
Well.... they didn't technically say NO, so....let's say yes.
(This is opt-out.)
-
Oliphantom Menacereplied to Oliphantom Menace last edited by
Opting out is easy!
First: Know the thing exists. Know that they are opting all of your data into AI.
Second: Log in to the thing, even if you haven't visited for years.
Third: Find the little 'Do not share my stuff with AI' buried in a submenu and turn it off.
Totally simple, note that it requires YOU to do all the work to tell them they do NOT have consent?
There's a reason the opt-out pattern is explicitly frowned upon under GDPR rules.
-
Stefan Bohacekreplied to Oliphantom Menace last edited by
@oliphant Yeah, people getting upset over folks not wanting to opt into a random third party tool might want to redirect their frustration at a company with tens of millions of dollars in funding choosing to use a proprietary protocol instead of an open standard.
-
@oliphant (And yes, ATproto is technically "open", but you know what I mean.)
-
Oliphantom Menacereplied to Stefan Bohacek last edited by
@stefan Hosting a relay is phenomenally expensive compared to hosting a fedi server, and they more or less designed the protocol to require increasingly large amounts of storage over time as the traffic grows.
When it comes to 'hosting your own', it's very much a protocol for rich people, for more affluent web hosts.
-
@oliphant This is the same logic used by rapists to justify sexual assault.
"She was asking for it by dressing that way!"
"She let us scrape it because she posted it publicly!""She didn't say she didn't want to!"
"She didn't opt out of our program!"Not asking for consent is GROSS. It doesn't matter if it's sex or something else. If you're doing something to someone or their belongings without consent then you're doing something wrong.
-
@stefan @oliphant I think it's partially that & partially wanting an improvement on what ActivityPub offers. ATProtocol is better at distributing messages than ActivityPub, but suffers from requiring a centralized relay, which may or may not (it definitely is) intentional. ActivityPub is a step in the right direction but it's janky & either needs both to be better specified & to have something else better replace it. ATProtocol solves alot of the jank, but it's bad for other reasons.
It's not bluesky's fault or fediverse's fault that someone made a program to scrape & crosspost things automatically & didn't ask for consent from users to do that.
If you wanted to blame bluesky for making ATProtocol (which isn't proprietary), you could also blame Mastodon & other server software for not adding ATProtocol support.
-
"you could also blame Mastodon & other server software for not adding ATProtocol support"
I'm sure if there were resources for that, folks would be already working on it.
-
@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] people are already working on it though! @[email protected] has been working on ATProto integration for wafrn
-
@jackemled Couldn't agree more, and the comparison to sexual assault was icky on my part, but intentional.
-
Obviously I think Bridgy Fed should be opt-in, but I don't see what the protocol has to do with it. If there were fedi instances that was using data to train AIs, or encouraging third parties to train AIs on the data, I'd say federation there should be opt-in even though they're running AP.
