raddle.me

skyfaller, to kbin in A reminder that kbin is still violating the zlib license of Postmill (the software that powers Raddle)

The issue has been resolved to the satisfaction of Postmill (for anyone who doesn't feel like clicking through to read the update)

Montagge, to kbin in A reminder that kbin is still violating the zlib license of Postmill (the software that powers Raddle)
@Montagge@kbin.social avatar

What an absolute non-issue

TheVillageGuy,
@TheVillageGuy@kbin.social avatar

I would like more information, please. if I am running software on a public server which breaches any license or law I would like to at least be made aware of that

rubywingedflier, to technology in Mastodon thinks Lemmy’s privacy stinks. What say you?

I understand the impulse but the way some people get so hung up on trying to make a way to permanently and universally delete posts made on public facing social media and framing it as a “privacy” issue feels kinda like saying something you regret on mic at a town hall and being mad that you can’t permanently delete the memory of it from the minds of everyone present, and claiming that they violated your privacy by remembering it

mythmon,

it’s an interesting idea, but it doesn’t vibe with the reality of the laws in the EU which has “right to be forgotten” rules

wet_lettuce,

The “right to be forgotten” rules are, with all due respect to the EU regulators, pretty shortsighted.

I think the initial “right to be forgotten” lawsuit that Google faced from that Spanish guy-- where he claimed bankruptcy years prior. People( potential lenders?) kept finding that information online through google searches. He sued to have Google remove those sites from the index. He won and the Spanish Judge told Google they had to remove those results from searches.

But it didn’t change that the information was still on each site. Those sites, the ones that actually held the information didn’t get sued, just Google.

It also opened the door for oppressive governments covering up human rights abuses or hide other information they dont want widely available.

Google appealed and won: www.bbc.com/news/technology-49808208

I also want to point out that this Spanish guy’s situation is very different from “posting publicly on social media”. He was getting written about by others and the courts eventually said “no, this can stand. This information should remain available”. So I imagine, public statements made by an individual certainly wouldn’t qualify to be forgotten.

At the end of the day, to me, this is a technical decision not a privacy one.

lowleveldata, to technology in Mastodon thinks Lemmy’s privacy stinks. What say you?

It is reasonable that people should be able to delete their posts / comments. However I don’t see how is this related to “privacy”. How can something you post on a public forum be private?

fidodo,

I’m also not sure how it’s enforceable in a distributed system.

__forward__,

Blockchains have the property of being append-only, so a blockchain is precisely what makes it impossible to delete transactions. That being said, in a distributed system, once the message leaves trusted servers, it is obviously also impossible to delete it.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • fightinggames
  • All magazines