Fediverse is 100% Decentralized or not?

I can’t help but feel that you’re conflating censorship with centralization. A defederated network just means that the servers you’re on will choose what they’d like to censor. Running your own server or looking for one which you probably agree with is something which may work for you, while giving others the ability to defederate and not have to read what you’re saying.

Censorship is also decentralised which means no single entity will be able to completely control the information, but that doesn't mean you can do whatever you want without consequence of all the decentralised instances agreeing that particular information should not be shared. Decentralisation does not guarantee you an audience!

If you start your own server, you moderate yourself.

Whether others want to federate with your server is up to them.

You can absolutely have free speech, but nobody is forced to actually listen to you.

Which is good, because in the real world, every place that has "zero censorship" rapidly devolves into a Nazi invested shithole.
- Ya, I agree with you that no one is forced to actually listen to me, but removing content... I mean, I was spending a lot of time writing those and looking for replies, but they just remove it before anyone sees it... That sucks.
But other people who are on my server might think the same way as I mentioned
- You should have spent time reading the rules of your server before spending time with writing your content. It doesn't matter if others care or not. Someone has a wall and is letting you write on it. It's their wall, not yours. They can make their own rules. You are free to have your own wall.
- You don't need to allow other people on your server.
- Well it’s yours so you get to decide. Go make your own platform and you can have all the freedom you want. But it always seems to be that folks want a share of someone else’s platform, and when they can’t get it, their freedom has been taken away. SMH

Its decentralized nature isn't due to censorship, or a lack of it, but its structure. Of course there's going to be some degree of censorship because instances all have individual rules which, if you break, you'll be penalized for which can take the form of removal of content.

The only way to have total free speech is create your own instance which is a total free for all but then you'll attract the worst sort of people and your instance will end up defederated by instance owners who don't want content from literal Nazis federated to their instances.

That second paragraph highlights exactly how the Fediverse works. If you're a shitty friend, no one will want to be friends with you.

Start your own instance and community. Post whatever the hell you like.

Then other instances choose whether to defederate. They federate by default.

There is no single point of control (centralisation) which decides what is seen on all instances.

However, the removal of content and the banning of accounts are things that are diminishing my passion for sharing my thoughts publicly(on reddit).

I just dont want this happened on here but I am seeing some...

Those post/comment removal and user banning are for a good reason. For every one innocent content removed there's a large amount of harmful content removed as well.

yeah this seems like a self tell...

what is it they want to say that's getting them banned?

I've literally never been banned off a platform before.

Your right to choose is the same as everybody else's right to choose. You can decide to post something, and others can decide they don't want to see it. Decentralized just means there is no one entity to make those decisions for you.

Federation and "censorship" aren't mutually exclusive?

It's not about freedom of speech (or by some peoples interpretation it would be more accurately called 'anarchy of speech'). The need for moderation still exists just as the rights higher in the hierarchy of human rights still exist and need protection - especially from armchair anarchists.

Hey now, anarchists don't deserve this slander. Moderation typically falls under freedom of association/disassociation, which we're strongly in favor of. The people you have a problem with are the ones that think you should be forced to listen to them, which is pretty contrary to the anarchist ethos.

You’re mixing up words and definitions.

I'm just wondering what you are sharing that is getting you censored off of most of the major instances. Something illegal? Something morally reprehensible that most regular people take objection to it? Like I understand Beehaw being very uptight about what they allow (to the point of defederating most major instances) but world just seems free for all but the most extreme views, ml will allow straight up genocide and warcrime denial as long as it's China or Russia, and shitjustworks seems to be gamers in general, left or right.

Like there are instances that are just basically unmoderated free speech zones if that's what you're looking for. There are even instances that are echochambers for your political leanings if that's what you are actually looking for. But most of the major instances are going to be catering for a more general userbase. Afterall, part of the reason world became the biggest is because it's the one most former redditors were pointed to.

And the reality is, and part of the reason I'm apprehensive about Meta joining the fediverse, is because even in a decentralized environment, communities, opinions, topics and activity all becomes centralized around whichever community is the biggest. The internet itself is a decentralized network, but since everyone gathers in the same places, it ultimately became centralized around sites like reddit, insta, youtube, and twitter. That's one of the reasons we are encouraged as fedi users to join smaller instances. Not just to save on space and traffic, but to encourage the activity in our local communities to grow.

Thx for explaining these to me bro, your point about the defederation of some instances is important, as it highlights the diversity and autonomy within the network, even though it might cause some fragmentation. And indeed, while every instance is privately operated, the option to host one's own instance provides individuals with the freedom to set their own rules.

while you have the ability to say what you want, in this you do not get to force others to read it. Make your own space, or find one that you like. It will be an echo chamber, but like I said no one is obligated to read what you post about.

The great thing about this system though is that you can always create an account on your own instance, and interact with any instance that hasn't been defederated from you.

I am not quite understand it, can you maybe explain a bit? Thx
- You can create your own Lemmy or Kbin server just for you and post whatever you want. Whether other servers federate with you is another matter of course.
  
  The Fediverse gives you absolute freedom of speech and everyone else absolute freedom to block you.
- They can ban your account from a particular instance, but you always move to or create a new one.

On this part of the Fediverse, things definitely lean a bit more left/center, in general, so that's something you may want to keep in mind with the communities you're interacting with. I've seen a few communities that lean a bit more to the right, but they're definitely more moderate, I've found. There's other parts of the Fediverse, though, that lean even further to the right. There's also a few that go waaaay further left than here. There's plenty of options.

But something else to consider, is that some of those instances are defederated this part of the overall network, so you may see that there's a sort of self-imposed firewall between some of these communities. But wherever you go, every instance is privately-operated, so you'll be beholden to somebody else's rules. The workaround for this is that you can host your own instance and do whatever you want. But, it's up to each individual community whether or not they want to allow your content on their platform, as much as it is you with yours.

I've not looked into your post history, so I don't know which way you lean. Maybe I agree with your opinions. Maybe I absolutely despise your hot takes. Either way, I hope you find an appropriate place to share them. Best of luck!

Centralized vs decentralized is a structural decision.

Censorship is what can be done within that structure. Centralized censorship means one group is able to block content, whereas decentralized "censorship" means that you can go to another platform with little to no fuss.

I use quotations because censorship is when you censor someone and stop their message from being seen, which you cannot do in federation. No one is required to megaphone info or opinions they don't want to share, so it's not really censorship to block content on your own instance.

I think "polycentric" is a better term than "decentralized."

Every instance is a center, and is vulnerable to failure and corruption like any service provider. But at least we have a choice of instances, and there isn't a single point of failure for the whole network.

I mean, they're practically interchangeable words. They mean fairly the same thing. Polycentric is decentralized. You can use that word if it works for you, but decentralized is still correct.
- Then what would you call a network where specific data isn't tied to specific nodes and lost when the node goes down?
I think that might be a little too macro for newcomers to understand.
- macro?
I don't think you quite understand what 'decentralized' means. Decentralization means there's no central server, implying no data collection, no restrictions or moderation, and no banning.

Furthermore, it won't corrupt when a single node breaks down. This is because a decentralized network is essentially built by all users within the network. Whenever one user quits or a node breaks down, there are always other nodes/users available to maintain the network. That's the essence of a decentralized network.
- Implying no data collection, no restrictions or moderation, and no banning
  
  That is absolutely incorrect. All of those things can and do exist but it is dependent on each instance. There isn’t a single entity controlling those things, each fediverse instance decides for themselves. One instance could collect everything you do, restrict what you post, moderate what users post and comment, and ban users as they please.
  
  Decentralisation doesn’t mean “no rules”
- I just said that lemmy is not a decentralized network...

Run your own instance and federate with everybody.

you have been here an hour - I think you need to read some around how lemmy/federation and instances work.

In this case I think WireMin could be a choice, they are 100% decentralized, so no censorship and pretty secure, its e2ee

Never heard about it

Centralisation in this instance refers to control over the network and standard itself rather than control over what's posted on it. There's no single authority that can unilaterally change how every Fediverse instance and system works - for example, there isn't anyone who can decree that from now on Lemmy will no longer allow connections from Canada, or that nobody is allowed to post pictures of capybaras any more.

It's intended to prevent a /u/spez or Elon Musk situation where one asshole can bring down the entire ecosystem built around an API. Nothing stops anyone else from hosting their own instance if they dislike lemmy.world, whereas if you don't like Twitter, you can't just host your own copy of it.

Monero.town is very lax when it comes to moderation as long as you don't say anything that could get you arrested in Germany.

What if I am in the US lol
- If its a german instance they have to follow german law.
  
  Just like if you’re an american living in germany. You don’t get to follow american law in germany. You have to abide by the local laws.
  
  Take for example, the irish hosted lemmy defederated from another instance that allows posting … questionable/underage anime content. Its treated the same as CSAM under Irish law. Federating those instances would mean the admins of the irish instance would be liable for any data pulled over onto their instance.

The fediverse being decentralized means that there are many servers/instances, each with their own codes of conduct (or lack of one). Similarly, different communities on those servers can have different rules they might want to enforce with removals of posts or comments. For example, a community about cat pictures will have a rule about posts having to be cat pictures and will remove a post about your grandma's vegetable soup recipe.

If your comment/post was removed, that probably means your post/comment was either against the rules of the community or against the code of conduct of the entire server/instance. If it's the former, look for or create a community where that kind of content is appreciated. If you're running up against the code of conduct of the instance, look for a server/instance where your content wouldn't be violating the code of content or make your own server/instance where you're the one defining the code of conduct. Of course, that code of conduct would only apply to communities on your server.

If your server becomes a source of constant shit, admins of other servers might decide to defederate from your server. Think of it like making your own email server: if too many of your email server's emails are spam, other email providers might decide to designate your email server as a spam factory and block all emails coming from it.