• curious_dolphin@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    You’re mixing multiple subjects here, one being the logistics of blocking a federated system like Lemmy, the other being whether the wrong person finds the content of such a system objectionable and labels it a “national security issue.”

    I’m being a tad pedantic here, but my reason for pointing this out is that I think #2 is not far fetched at all, but I’m unsure of how feasible #1 might be and would love if somebody who knows more than I do would chime in.

    EDIT: Looks like some have already discussed #2 in the other comment thread started by Teknikal.

    • shrugs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      There is a big difference. If a platform belongs to a single entity, you can pressure that entity especially if its profit driven. If there are thousands interconnected platforms that only share an open protocol the most you can do is shutdown a single instance. That’s why an open protocol creating decentralized instances is so much different than a centralized platform. It’s like trying to ban email or censor speak: not that has never been tried, but that is a whole different cup of tea.