Other places where you can find me

  • 1 Post
  • 41 Comments
Joined 10 months ago
cake
Cake day: August 24th, 2023

help-circle


  • orizuru@lemmy.sdf.orgtoPrivacy@lemmy.ml*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I see you already have an answer using podman.

    But don’t be afraid of the command line. If you can copy/paste a few commands, it’s pretty easy to set up.

    I honestly find installing docker harder than to start a locally hosted searxng instance.

    Also, something like self-hosting your own email is way harder and requires a lot more maintenance. I’d leave that project to further down the line.



  • The EFF has supported the prosecution of Kiwi Farms, but not by using ISP blocks.

    They understand that setting a legal precedent like this may cause serious harm to other people in the future (e.g. women).

    Once an ISP indicates it’s willing to police content by blocking traffic, more pressure from other quarters will follow, and they won’t all share your views or values. For example, an ISP, under pressure from the attorney general of a state that bans abortions, might decide to interfere with traffic to a site that raises money to help people get abortions, or provides information about self-managed abortions. Having set a precedent in one context, it is very difficult for an ISP to deny it in another, especially when even considering the request takes skill and nuance. We all know how lousy big user-facing platforms like Facebook are at content moderation—and that’s with significant resources. Tier 1 ISPs don’t have the ability or the incentive to build content evaluation teams that are even as effective as those of the giant platforms who know far more about their end users and yet still engage in harmful censorship.

    https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/08/isps-should-not-police-online-speech-no-matter-how-awful-it



  • The EFF supported the prosecution of people from Kiwi Farms for their activities, just opposed their website to be taken out at the ISP level. I feel a lot of people jumped on the EFF without reading the full article.

    Once an ISP indicates it’s willing to police content by blocking traffic, more pressure from other quarters will follow, and they won’t all share your views or values. For example, an ISP, under pressure from the attorney general of a state that bans abortions, might decide to interfere with traffic to a site that raises money to help people get abortions, or provides information about self-managed abortions. Having set a precedent in one context, it is very difficult for an ISP to deny it in another, especially when even considering the request takes skill and nuance. We all know how lousy big user-facing platforms like Facebook are at content moderation—and that’s with significant resources. Tier 1 ISPs don’t have the ability or the incentive to build content evaluation teams that are even as effective as those of the giant platforms who know far more about their end users and yet still engage in harmful censorship.

    https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/08/isps-should-not-police-online-speech-no-matter-how-awful-it