Ah, gotcha. Those are one-time passwords. Same acronym, so it’s easy to confuse them.
But yeah, I agree that everything should use (T)OTP for two-factor authentication, instead of SMS messages. The later mainly provides a false sense of security and presents only a minor hurdle for attackers to overcome.
One time pads or bust motherfuckers.
Not sure if you’re being facetious, but one time pads are for encryption, not authentication. They’re also impractical (and overkill) for most purposes.
You might find this helpful: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2022/12/user-generated-content-and-fediverse-legal-primer
Like I said, they have to maintain their own patch to make that work, which needs to be updated for each new Lemmy version. It’s not something that mainline Lemmy will do.
then I really will not get into it.
Bet.
If this is your idea of being “sex positive” then I really do not want to get into this argument. I can guess this will quickly play out to any objection as “pearl clutching” and I will stick to the point that your attitude is completely dehumanizing and that there is nothing “positive” about reducing sex to the mechanical/physical act.
DEHUMANIZING? Seriously? I guess you actually are a SWERF. You clearly have no claim to the label “sex positive”. Why would you even want to identify as such?
The view I expressed here is consistent with how sex workers view themselves. Sex work is work. They’re just doing a job. They don’t want to be “rescued” by moralizing radfems. They want more pay and better working conditions, the same as most workers.
Like I said in the first comment, if you feel so strongly about this, go ahead and create your own and see how far it goes. When you start putting some Skin In The Game you will get more credibility or at least accept that things are Just Not That Simple.
And as I’ve said, I’m definitely interested in doing that. If you know of any IT people that want to work on such a project, send them my way. I’ve got experience with programming, leadership, and community building to bring to the table.
Given your attitude regarding (more than just performative) sex positivity though, I’m not sure why you’re egging me on here.
You lamented the fact that unlogged users can not see it and that they can not be found as easily. This is the same as “make it available to the public without any type of check”.
Behold! (nsfw) - no login required, just an “are you 18+?” prompt, which is pretty standard. You can also search for NSFW communities without logging in. If you’re being more moralistic about this than Reddit is, you’re probably taking it too far.
Sexuality != Porn
Porn ∈ Sexuality. Also, I intentionally used a broader term here, because what I’m advocating for is expansive, not restricted to just porn. For example, I miss r/bdsmcommunity and r/sex, which are discussion-only. However, you don’t get those kinds of communities growing in a place as structurally and culturally prudish as the threadiverse.
“toxicity” is dose-dependent.
Yeah, porn is about on par with video games in that regard. Yet we (rightly) don’t suppress gaming communities here.
You don’t see young people destroying their lives because they were promised they could make a lot of money by knitting sweaters or working as electricians, but cases of vulnerable women who regret getting into sex work are infinite.
C’mon, don’t get all SWERFy on me now. That regret is a direct result of (drum roll)… sex negative culture! (And capitalist labor exploitation.)
“If you think sex workers ‘sell their bodies,’ but coal miners do not, your view of labor is clouded by your moralistic view of sexuality.”
Look, I want a world in which, to the extent that jobs continue to be a thing, acting in commercial porn is just as normal and unremarkable as any other job, and people don’t get all judgy about it. Same (hopefully robust) labor protections too. We don’t get to there without abandoning pearl-clutching attitudes towards the resulting product, among other things.
You seem to be implying that I’m arguing something that I’m not? This thread started with me lamenting that piefed.social accounts are prohibited from accessing NSFW communities, and inquiring whether feddit.online would have the same policies. Along with some commentary on the general state of the threadiverse’s culture.
Note that I haven’t asked either admin to host said communities, and I specifically acknowledged the caching issue. Nor am I advocating for them to be treated on absolutely equal footing; they’re specially marked so that people who don’t want to see them can filter them out, which I think is a good thing.
what do you think will happen if you create an online space and put a big billboard saying “here you will always be free to share your NSFW content”?
If you’re specifically advertising it as focused on that, then that’s likely what you’ll get. If you allow NSFW but don’t center it, you’ll end up with something like Reddit, Twitter, or pre-ban Tumblr. While there are things to criticize about those sites, very little of it has to do with porn.
Content discovery of porn should not be as easy and it should not be trivialized under the pretense of “sex positivity”.
Why? That absolutely sounds like a sex-negative attitude to me. It’s treating sexuality as something toxic that needs to be suppressed and hidden even from those that are interested in seeing it. Sex positivity means treating sexuality as a normal thing that is not unusual for people to be interested in.
Every one wants to talk about supportive they are on sex positivity until some men in uniform knocks on their doors because they are running a website that is available for minors all around the world.
Are you speaking from first-hand experience, or is this conjecture? At least in the US, complying with the law isn’t that difficult.
Also, I don’t even want to get in the discussion of “sex positivity” being associated with “easily available porn”.
That’s an odd way to avoid discussing it. Do you think the availability of porn (or prohibition thereof) within an online space has no effect on what kind of culture develops there?
I’ve considered it, but my skillset isn’t really suited to it as a solo project. I can write code, and I have a reasonable understanding of the human factors side of things, but my IT skills are lacking. I’d be happy to join a team of like-minded people undertaking such a project, though.
It’s not that I want the threadiverse to deliver porn to me. I’m capable of finding that myself. It’s that I like sex-positive culture and think it’s a good thing for humanity overall.
As I noted, my complaint isn’t about any specific instance admin. Individually, no one should be required to host or cache anything that they don’t want to. However, the overall trend of blocking NSFW communities is still concerning, and we should advocate for admins to not do that where feasible.
The design decision to hide NSFW communities from logged-out users also plays a part here. Community discovery is bad enough as it is, and this makes it even worse. Last I checked, lemmynsfw was having to maintain their own patch to fix it, and keep updating it as new lemmy versions are released. Kbin and PieFed also copied this behavior, and I assume Mbin inherited it.
Good to see another public PieFed instance. Any idea if this one allows subscribing to NSFW communities? They’re entirely blocked by piefed.social, unfortunately.
Nothing against @rimu (or any other individual admin) for not wanting to deal with having NSFW content cached on his server, but I find the collective prudishness of the threadiverse disheartening. I think it hinders our growth, and fosters a worse culture overall. It’s kind of ironic that Reddit, for all it’s other flaws, is more sex-positive than the threadiverse is.
db0, I think you’re cool overall, but your characterization of PugJesus here is pretty unreasonable. :/
the Sub is supposed to be the one that’s actually in control
This is a myth, presumably meant to be reassuring to subs that are new to BDSM, at the expense of risk awareness. In principle the sub is no more “in control” than the dom is, and in practice they are often significantly less so.
Alright, fair enough. Keep in mind though that this comment thread started with an assertion that Bitcoin didn’t get it quite right, and Monero did, which is more of a big-picture analysis thing than merely “can I buy something with this”. My responses have been in that vein.
It seems like you’re arguing against a position that I don’t hold? I’ve been invested in Bitcoin for a long time, and I’m quite familiar with its technical and socioeconomic dynamics. I’m skeptical of altcoins specifically, not of cryptocurrency as a concept.
Scalability isn’t quite as simple as “how much data can a well-off enthusiast from a developed country store”. You need to consider the behavior of your lowest common denominator users.
You want as many users as possible to run fully-verifying nodes, rather than SPV (“simplified payment verification”) nodes that can be tricked by a malicious miner. The more transactions are being done through SPV nodes, the more potential payoff there is for an attacker, and the more resources they can dedicate to an attack.
Further, if your number of full nodes gets low enough, it becomes feasible for state actors to track down and compromise the remaining node operators. At that point, you may as well just be using a centralized, government approved payment system instead.
IMO, you shouldn’t be investing in cryptocurrencies or any currencies for that matter. Currencies should be
used, not hoarded with the expectation of gain. If you’re buying cryptocurrencies as an investment, you’ve already lost.
Cryptocurrencies literally cannot function without speculative investment. Even in the absence of formal investors, *someone* has to be the first person to accept the tokens in exchange for something of value, in hopes that they will have value of their own in the future. Until then, the tokens are unusable.
Further, the market cap and liquidity of a cryptocurrency impose practical limits on what it can be used for. You can’t very well conduct a billion dollar transaction through a cryptocurrency that has a market cap in the millions. Investment raises the market cap, “unlocking” these higher-value use cases. Conversely, loss of investor confidence will reduce the market cap, and effectively reduce the utility of the coin.
This is why ability to scale is so important. The current market values of Bitcoin and the various alts are based far more on speculative investment than they are on usage. Those investors believe that the coins will see far more usage (and have far more natural demand) in the future than they do today. If that turns out not to be the case due to an inability to scale, investors will start to flee, and the vicious cycle will start.
Oh damn. When I first looked into Session I was really excited, until I found out that the anonymity layer was based on an altcoin. Which means that you’re only anonymous as long as line goes up. I didn’t expect it to fail quite this quickly though.
I miss 90’s techno-libertarian utopianism. A little naive in retrospect, but I’m holding out hope that it’ll still have some relevance going forward.