This is a real problem but it doesn't seem to have anything to do with Zuckerberg or Meta in particular. The article admits it's unlikely that this hour-long ban was a top-down decision. People get banned with no recourse on all the big platforms.

But yes, a solution is for people to host their own content/sites. Or "protocols not platforms"

▲

pixl97 4 hours ago | parent [-]

>a solution is for people to host their own content/sites.

In a perfect world yes. In the reality we live in no.

Why is this the case?

1. Any site that is politically active and capable of upsetting people WILL BE ATTACKED. Can you afford a terabyte of data a second coming your way? Probably not. So you put it behind CF, but now you're vulnerable to their policies closing you down.

2. Any site that is politically active and capable of upsetting people WILL BE ATTACKED. What are you going to do against floods of child porn or death threats posted by users pretending to be on your side, but actually working for the opposition?

3. Any site that is politically active and capable of upsetting people WILL BE ATTACKED. You are now in charge of your website security. Are you any good at it? How are you going to pay for it to be secured? How do you trust the people doing the security?

4. Any site that is politically active and capable of upsetting people WILL BE ATTACKED. How do you plan on getting people to come to your site? If it's upsetting enough to the powers that be any messages containing links to your site will disappear from Meta/X/Google. You are going to have to find neat an interesting, and probably expensive ways to get your message out.

We have consolidated the internet down to a point where it is very very easy for a few small groups to control the general discussion, especially across large diverse groups of people.

▲

slibhb 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

"CF might shut me down" applies to some groups but not most and certainly not to No Kings

	▲	bluGill 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Perhaps, but I'm involved in more than one group.

▲

tempfile 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Most of this is mitigated completely by making everything read-only except for a small number of users you know personally. That doesn't actually preclude most kinds of political work (e.g. noticeboards for protest organising). It does preclude social media, obviously.

	▲	pixl97 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		See, the problem here is you've already been put on the footing of the group that loses. You have to hide like a little mouse in the shadows. Meanwhile the cat gets to track your every move. The cat gets, not only to defend itself where ever it wants, it can say anything it wants about you without you with you having no way to defend yourself. Can if the cat is both evil and particularly smart it will set up things like its own No Kings forums where every person is tracked and manipulators either block or allow messages based on how much they can control the audience into reaching the opposite goal they actually want. When someone goes looking for you, who are they going to find? With the modern net, probably not who you want them to find.