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.

  • VampirePenguin@midwest.socialEnglish
    130·
    14 days ago

    Bluesky is a for-profit company that is capitalizing on the Xodus. They may be better for the time being, but the march for more and more profit will end the same as it always does. Enshittification. They are not the good guys, the fediverse is.

    • surph_ninja@lemmy.worldEnglish
      251·
      14 days ago

      It was an obvious op from the beginning. You could tell by the people they were trotting out to sell it. Lots of liberal pro-authority types.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      10·
      13 days ago

      They are not the good guys, the fediverse is.

      I think you’re overselling the Fediverse here. The Fediverse also absolutely has censorship, it’s just by individual instance admins instead of a for-profit company. If large, influential instances shut down or defederate, a lot of content goes with it.

      Yeah, federated instances technically cache that data, but those communities are effectively dead, links are broken, etc. Users can jump to other services, sure, but the service isn’t the same.

      We’ve seen this here on Lemmy. Beehaw was a cool instance, but they defederated fairly early on. Lemmy.ml was super impactful, but their admins are super aggressive with moderation to the point that many avoid their communities. And so on.

      Whether “the Fediverse” is good depends on your instance and the mods and admins of the various communities you are part of. That kind of sucks.

      Maybe it sucks less than whatever major social media network you’re comparing to, but I hesitate to call it “good,” just different.

      • 73ms@sopuli.xyzEnglish
        4·
        13 days ago

        Well it is fundamentally better because it does not only have a single party that makes all the calls thanks to the real decentralization. I wouldn’t call all of fediverse “the good guys” but I would call it “good”.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          1·
          13 days ago

          Sure. It’s like comparing having one tyrant, which can be good or bad (but at least isn’t going anywhere) vs a lot of tyrants whose power is limited to their little area, and who will come and go. I guess that’s better, but I don’t think anyone would say it’s “good,” just a bit better.

          I like the Fediverse, I just think it only went halfway to solving the problem.

      • squozenode@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        13 days ago

        There’s always gonna be an admin of some kind unless we all run our own instances, but that ends up with everyone just in large echo chambers again, as they federate only with people they agree with, or to scream at people they don’t.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          2·
          13 days ago

          That’s not necessarily true. Is there an admin of BitTorrent? Not really, people just contribute resources and the network keeps on trucking.

          I’d like to see more exploration of P2P networks like BitTorrent. It should be that a single person leaving the network doesn’t impact anyone, data just gets shuffled so it stays available. The tricky part is moderation, but surely that’s a solvable problem.

      • VampirePenguin@midwest.socialEnglish
        1·
        13 days ago

        For sure. Not that we don’t have problems, but corporate overlords mining our data or censoring us for political back scratching aren’t among them. That’s all imma trying to say.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          1·
          13 days ago

          Nothing is really stopping them from mining your data on Lemmy, all they need is to create an instance and federate, and then get can hoover up whatever they want.

          Censorship is more difficult, sure. But we’re still subject to whatever arbitrary censorship the mods and admins want.

          I think the Fediverse is on net better, but I do think the model has many other problems, and that it’s more of a stepping stone to something better. But being “better” doesn’t mean we’re “good” and the other options are “bad,” it just means we make different tradeoffs. There’s a very real risk of large instances shutting down because the admins lost interest, for example, and that’s less of a concern for a for-profit operation.

          I guess my point is to not oversell the Fediverse. It’s cool, hence why I’m here, but it’s far from perfect.

    • VerbFlow@lemmy.worldEnglish
      102·
      14 days ago

      I should’ve been on here instead. I legitimately thought that Anarchists, Communists, &c could make a difference being on there. Now I get people deliberately blocking accounts that aren’t even fascist, and being concerned with “bullying” instead of actually solving real problems. BSky has upper-class liberals talking about D&D, whining about how laws aren’t being followed correctly, cheerleading American imperialism, making unfunny jokes, and claiming that radical politics came from 4chan rather than legitimate political grieviances. All sorts of suburban slime. I really should’ve been elsewhere.