Original post: https://bsky.app/profile/ssg.dev/post/3lmuz3nr62k26

Email from Bluesky in the screenshot:

Hi there,

We are writing to inform you that we have received a formal request from a legal authority in Turkey regarding the removal of your account associated with the following handle (@carekavga.bsky.social) on Bluesky.

The legal authority has claimed that this content violates local laws in Turkey. As a result, we are required to review the request in accordance with local regulations and Bluesky’s policies.

Following a thorough review, we have determined that the content in question violates local laws in Turkey, as outlined in the legal request. In compliance with these legal provisions, we have restricted access to your account for users.

  • toy_boat_toy_boat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    222
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    pardon my ignorance, but how is a de-centralized and de-federated online community bound to such annoyances?

    • egerlach@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      101
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      For those who don’t know, Bluesky isn’t really federated. The only way to host a non-Bluesky instance required 1TB of storage in July 2024, and 5 TB of storage in Nov 2024. Could be way more than that now.

      You basically have to be a company to federate into the ATProto (Bluesky) ecosystem. You can’t just “stand up an instance”.

      Lots of detail: https://dustycloud.org/blog/how-decentralized-is-bluesky/

      (I know you’ve already realized that you were conflating Mastodon with Bluesky, I’m putting this here for others who come along so they can get the facts).

        • communism@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          3 months ago

          It’s not an outlandish amount, but for instance I have my own VPS where I host a variety of services, and it still has under 1TB storage. Most hobbyists who rent a VPS would have less storage than that.

          • fishos@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            My Jellyfin server is 6 times that… And my gaming PC is double that… Seriously, this person thinks 5TB is a lot? Don’t we have SD Cards/Flash Drives this big now? I’d be WAY more concerned about the bandwidth requirements.

            Edit: laughing my ass off at the downvotes. Yes, my server has 30TB. Yes my PC has around 12TB. It wasn’t expensive or hard. The hard drives in my Jellyfin are NAS drives… Bunch of people acting like you need quantum computers to run a node lmfao. Storage space is easy. It’s the networking and bandwidth part that’s hard. So yeah, complaining that 5TB of storage puts it out of reach of the average person when one 12tb NAS drive cost $200? Just bitching. Plain and simple.

            • AllHailTheSheep@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              its still not a small amount of storage. and no, there’s still not really sd cards or flash drives bigger than 1tb, but obviously even if there were and they were super cheap, that would still never suffice as server storage. plus, if you’re hosting a node you’d want at least 4 or 5 times that storage to use a raid 5 or 6 array + at least one onsite backup, and one off-site backup.

              now we’re talking thousands of dollars in equipment just for storage, not the actual server itself, internet connection, etc.

              • fishos@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                You literally just described my Jellyfin, minus the raid because I don’t feel like setting it up. Think all in all I’m down about $1200 for it. Not thousands. You do realized a 12TB NAS drive is $200, right? Only reason my build cost as much is because I have a few 2TB ssds in there which were just leftovers from the PC anyways. I could’ve done it all for $500.

                Off-site backup isn’t required. Nice, but not required at all. In the literal sense, you don’t need it. It’s good to have, but an extra.

                So yeah, 5TB, literally the only metric I was discussing, isn’t much. Maybe in the future the person should say all the nuance and not “5TB is unreasonable for the average person”. It’s not. Plain and simple.

                • AllHailTheSheep@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 months ago

                  maybe your hobbiest server doesn’t need a off-site backup but an instance of a massive social media network expected to be used by many users absolutely will. and sorry, but your nas simply will not cut it as far as throughput goes. it’s just not designed for that much activity.

                  • fishos@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    You keep missing the point so hard I think it’s intentional.

                    First off, necessary and recommended are two very different things. 4chan running for the last decade on outdated software with no backups is proof that you absolutely can run things without a backup. It’s not wise, but not REQUIRED.

                    Secondly, OP was up there acting like 5Tb is prohibitively expensive and is gonna keep instances from being made. As me and other hobbyist have pointed out, 5tb is a joke. Those of us running little bullshit servers have WAY more. So asking someone trying to set up a social media server to have 5TB is nothing. If that seems like a lot to you, then you shouldn’t even try because it’s clearly way beyond your depth.

      • aeshna_cyanea@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        3 months ago

        That’s only if you want to maintain a full archive. You don’t actually have to store a full archive to run a relay

    • merc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      ·
      3 months ago

      You’re right that Bluesky isn’t federated, but it most definitely is centralized.

    • heavyboots@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      3 months ago

      The answer it’s, they’re neither thing right now. And the claim has been made that in order to run your own instance that forwarded all traffic generated by the primary instance, you would need equivalent hardware to what BlueSky currently has. Vs Mastdon, which is…

      • not commercially owned
      • has a proven federation capability
      • Running a pretty large number of instances right now
      • toy_boat_toy_boat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 months ago

        interesting! so i’m probably conflating my expectations for bluesky with lemmy, when all the while i should actually be on mastadon. i was starting to wonder if bluesky was just a new us dem party project :\

    • paraphrand@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      Wouldn’t your “home” server in an activity pub network always be subject to such requests?

      • BakedCatboy@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        The difference is that if your home server is outside of Turkey then you can tell them to kick rocks. Bluesky probably complies because they don’t want to be blocked from Turkey. In a truly decentralized system like activitypub, only the server hosting the account / content in question risks being blocked, which means almost nothing the closer you get to a single account instance. Meanwhile every other server not in Turkey would not notice a difference.

        Edit: this was under the assumption that they took it down completely, but it looks like they only geofenced it. Regardless, if they are pressured enough they would be capable of completing hiding an account worldwide, which isn’t possible with activitypub without the legal alignment of every instance’s country since bluesky on the other hand has sole control of the only relay.

        • paraphrand@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          I’m not an expert on how activity pub works, but… You’re saying if I had an account on mastodon.social, and if mastodon.social took down a post from my @[email protected] account that, regardless of takedown reason, it would still be visible from other instances?

          I’m trying to understand precisely where the resiliency lies.

          • BakedCatboy@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            I’m saying that if your home server (mastodon.social in your example) is outside of Turkey, then there is less reason for them to comply in the first place because they only risk the mastodon.social server being blocked in Turkey. That one is a bad example because they’re one of the largest and they might have a bunch of users in Turkey, so if you want to be extra safe, you’d want to pick a server that isn’t so big so that they are less likely to care about complying with some other county that they might not have any users from.

            If the server you use is based inside the country that has a problem with your content, then you’d be screwed - though all the other servers will still mirror and cache your content for a bit even if you get taken down.

            The resiliency lies in the fact that you can choose to register in a country that is politically friendly towards your posts or if your home country is friendly but you want to avoid being taken down, you can self host a single user instance and refuse any requests from other countries.

            Edit: Now that I think about it, there’s also the fact that as long as the account itself isn’t limited by their home server, the content in question would be accessible through the federated copies, so if the home server isn’t within Turkey / jurisdiction and doesn’t take down the account, the country trying to take down the content would need to send takedown requests or request to geofence the content to each individual server on the entire fediverse - since the home server would be freely federating it to every server with users who follow the content, otherwise they would need to block every fediverse server and every new one every day that more pop up.

OSZAR »