Being an old grandpa not that adept at tech, I don’t know how Lemmy works. I mean, I know it’s decentralized and it’s supposed to be better than reddit, but still, how vulnerable is this platform from censors looking to block anything in here?

Are we invincible like those thepiratebay.org instances which jump up the more you try to censor them or are we basically like reddit. In other words, can I reliably access lemmy in China?

    • stevehobbes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      As of yesterday, the largest is of course Threads. Not sure if it’s actually mastodon, I assume not, but it does use ActivityPub and is part of the fediverse.

      Or maybe not as a lot of people have pointed out that it isn’t actually federated with anything yet, so maybe it isn’t activitypub.

      • whileloop@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        And, of course, it is (or will soon be) defederated by much of the Fediverse since we want nothing to do with Meta/Facebook.

        • kava@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          We’ll have to wait and see what actually happens. People went and signed NDAs with Meta. It’s up to the instance owners ultimately, and the big ones will inevitably start a cascading effect one way or the other.

          My gut tells me we’re gonna see federation with Meta

        • stevehobbes@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I mean maybe. Part of the beauty of this is that I also get to consume Threads content without being subject to any of their data collection outside of what I post and interact with. I can consume their content, they of course can consume mine, but they can’t actually track what I consume.

          • TheDarkKnight@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            I am skeptical about this. Not confronting your point nor offering a refutation but I am concerned about Meta collecting data on threads their users are participating in which may include user’s messages outside of their instances. I don’t know if this is a real potential or not, privacy experts may be able to weigh-in better but Meta’s track record concerns me.

            • Capricorny90210@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              A bit off topic ,but fun fact: I read that any site that uses Facebook analytics gets user data harvested. so even though you have no accounts with any meta products, you are, in theory, vulnerable to Meta data harvesting.

            • stevehobbes@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              No question they’re scumny. But because I’m not browsing their instance logged into their platform, they can’t see what i grab. Maybe they can fingerprint requests my client makes to load images, but the text of posts is going to be grabbed from the federated instance I’m logged into.

              They won’t inherently be able to tell me from any other lemmy.world user I don’t think.

              Of course anything I post that goes over there as part of federation will be tagged to my user, but they won’t be able to track me across the entire internet from that the way they can if I were logged into their service.

              I don’t know the exact privacy implications but I do know that I haven’t accepted their privacy policy which certainly limits what they can do (because they haven’t gotten me to agree that they can do anything they want).

      • bug@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Threads isn’t anything yet. It might use ActivityPub under the covers but we don’t know because they’ve not attempted to connect to anything else yet.

  • Dr. Jenkem@lemmy.blugatch.tube
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    can I reliably access lemmy in China?

    Not really, you would only be able to access instances that China hasn’t blocked.

    • rufus@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Are you sure? There are multiple sites where you can check if a site is blocked in china. I’ve put a few lemmy instances in the first 3 sites i found and they all claim they’re accessible. I’m not sure how ‘reliable’ that would be, but seems as of now they aren’t censored.

      • berkeleyblue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean in the end it’s a server somewhere like any other website. If your decide to block all traffic that goes to that site, yiu blocked it. The thing with lemmy is just that it’s decentralized and technically you could just another instance and acces the cache and interact ther from what I understand.

        So if if China works with a Blocklist and not an Allowlist, instances might go up faster than they can block them?

        • rufus@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yes, exactly. On the other hand the list of lemmy instances is public. And we even have websites that help new users to find a suitable one from the list of all known instances.

          I bet a censor like china has people or program(mer)s to to go through such a list and block each and every known instance. I’m not an expert on china. I wouldn’t be surprised if somebody told me they’re already doing it like that for other federated or distributed platforms.

    • stevehobbes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Unless China blocks all activitypub traffic, that’s a losing game of whack-a-mole. Or I guess they could scrape the federations of the instances they want to block and add them in real time.

      But yeah, you’re right it isn’t designed to evade state level censorship.

    • Jerald@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      How many instances are there? I can if I need to create my own instance right? So, it’s just like pirate bay I suppose, you close one instance another will take it’s place or am I mistaken?

      • Dr. Jenkem@lemmy.blugatch.tube
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yeah true. It would require some additional work if you wanted to federate with blocked instances though. Same goes for if you wanted to migrate the federated data in the event the instance gets blocked.

      • Dr. Jenkem@lemmy.blugatch.tube
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, unless that unblocked instance resides in China then it’s probably subject to the same restriction as you. Unless they proxy the federation traffic.

        Images are an issue though, as those don’t get cached by the local instance but are just links to the remote instance.

  • trachemys@iusearchlinux.fyi
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    lemmygrad.ml might actually be China. But each instance gives a list of the instances it federates with, so it should be easy for China to block them all. Lemmy has no features specifically for evading state censorship.

    • boredtortoise@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Some governmental agency/agencies & psyops definitely at play there. And not only there.

    • Jerald@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      do you think lemmy would be able to evade state censorship? If we wanted to that is. I really like those piratebay instances, trying to censor them is really difficult, even for the state (They can but it’s difficult to censor each and everyone one of them)

  • average650@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    As long as an instance that is federated with the instances you want is not blocked, you can access it.

    If they want to block all instances, there’s no reason they can’t.

    • anon@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      lemmy instances can be published through the onion network too

      can’t block those unless they block the tor network, but then you have bigger problems.

  • iso@lemmy.com.tr
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    To block a specific content from an instance, they have to block all instances because your instance is going to get that content from other instance instead of you. You are not even going to connect to that instance.

    But if they want to completely block the federation, they can.

  • rufus@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t think lemmy is made to circumvent censorships. There are other platforms for that. This is okay because sometimes this and being easy to use contradict each other.

    However. I think it’s doing a decent job. But admins of the individual instances will probably censor things that are against the law, because they are liable for that.

    • Jerald@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      pretty nice answer. You are right, many times that’s pretty contradictory.