this post was submitted on 21 Jan 2025
2259 points (99.0% liked)
Technology
60802 readers
2938 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You're mixing multiple subjects here, one being the logistics of blocking a federated system like Lemmy, the other being whether the wrong person finds the content of such a system objectionable and labels it a "national security issue."
I'm being a tad pedantic here, but my reason for pointing this out is that I think #2 is not far fetched at all, but I'm unsure of how feasible #1 might be and would love if somebody who knows more than I do would chime in.
EDIT: Looks like some have already discussed #2 in the other comment thread started by Teknikal.
There is a big difference. If a platform belongs to a single entity, you can pressure that entity especially if its profit driven. If there are thousands interconnected platforms that only share an open protocol the most you can do is shutdown a single instance. That's why an open protocol creating decentralized instances is so much different than a centralized platform. It's like trying to ban email or censor speak: not that has never been tried, but that is a whole different cup of tea.