Even if it’s just a recommendation on a different group in which to ask the question, I’m curious how Lemmy combats criminal activity and content like human trafficking, smuggling, terrorism, etc?

Is it just a matter of each node bans users when they identify a crime, and/or problematic nodes are defederated if they tolerate it?

And if defederated, does that mean each node has to individually choose to defederate from the one allowing criminal activity?

      • Kaboom@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        6 months ago

        For example, gun control often takes the form of “making it unreasonably hard for poor people to arm themselves”

    • LibertyLizard
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Regardless of you feel about them, website operators must abide by them in most jurisdictions. And therefore it would be naive for Lemmy’s developers to not at least consider this issue.

      • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        There are reporting features. In most jurisdictions, accepting reports and acting on them is plenty sufficient to meet any legal obligations, and many consider scanning every message unnecessarily invasive.

        I don’t, and literally everything on here is public, so it’s not identical, but look at the response to Apple’s proposed (otherwise privacy preserving) CSAM scanning on cloud photo backups.