The Funkwhale music platform is alive and in active development, and they’re working on a feature to filter far-right artists off the network. Some Fediverse self-hosters are divided on letting a third party decide what should be allowed in their library.

  • Frank Casa@frank.casa
    42·
    1 day ago

    And someone who is against Nazis might want to read Mien Kamph, not because they agree with Hitler, but because they want to understand the enemy so they can be better equipped to stop Nazis.

    • Monkey With A Shell@lemmy.socdojo.comEnglish
      43·
      1 day ago

      Indeed, the way to combat bad media is to dispute it with good media, not hide it away and pretend it doesn’t exist.

      Somewhat harder to do in the context of music like the app in question, but still not wrong. I keep copies of some old wartime propaganda cartoons around just for the ability to put context when talking about past events, despite them being pretty tasteless by modern standards.

      • frozenspinach@lemmy.mlEnglish
        1·
        20 hours ago

        Indeed, the way to combat bad media is to dispute it with good media, not hide it away and pretend it doesn’t exist.

        I would call this a marketplace of ideas fallacy. Rumor and misinformation rise to the top ever bit as much as good argument, and poisoning those conversations with bad faith is now part of an explicit ideological strategy to weaponize those spaces. That phenomenon is as real as thoughtful deliberation, I would say more so.

        So if you believe "combat bad with good’ works as a matter of practice, I think that argument is obviously unsustainable. If it’s “bad things will happen but we should keep it that way as a matter of principle” it’s at least a more coherent argument. I wouldn’t agree with it but I can understand why someone would find it at least a respectable idea.

        • Monkey With A Shell@lemmy.socdojo.comEnglish
          1·
          8 hours ago

          You call it a fallacy, but to propose that covering your eyes and ears makes the problem go away is hardly a solution.

          My issue is not the removal of bad content from the community, but the enforcement of it at a software level.

          Much like any other software in the fedi system there can be seen as three levels of the community:

          1: The global fedi where instances communicate across to each other, or in the case of problem instances, don’t and they’re cut off.

          2: The local instance (or pod as they’re called in this case) with a few to many thousand users each where local rules are enforced by community admins.

          3: The individual where you have the choice to follow certain people/groups or not and block those you see as problems.

          Now those three layers make for a pretty potent filtration system in themselves making the baked in decisions by the software author fairly redundant at best, but that’s not the end point. Say someone for whatever reason had a reason to store an archive of propaganda for studies, and they mean to share that with colleges in some project. They may set up a private pod or a few in a small collective to accomplish the goal. Forcing that filter at the software level makes it impossible to do in that way.

          So there’s already a nazi filter around the system in the form of this multi step sieve for banning these things, doing so at the software level though puts a censors button in the hands of a single person or small group of people who then exercise control over even niche cases where private collections are affected.