
Diaspora Foundation: A Child-Porn Sharing Network - Todamont
I ran a popular D* pod for about 7 years, called Cryptospora.net. We had approximately 30,000 users signed up. It was with much regret that I I shut my pod down, permanently, last month. Here&#x27;s why.<p>There were certain neo-Nazis who would get banned from pod after pod, but they just kept signing up at new or foreign-language pods, and it was impossible to prevent neo-Nazi content from being shared to my pod and being displayed in my feed. There is CURRENTLY a large amount of child pornography being shared on the D* network. It became impossible for me to stop child-porn content or neo-Nazi hatespeech content from being shared to my pod and displayed to my users.<p>I made a thread in the Discourse channel for Diaspora podmins, and a github issue ticket. I suggested that the programmer community within D* come together to implement some form of OPTIONAL federated moderation system, so that I could import ban lists from other pods (ones with an actual staff) and make my ban lists available for other pods to import, based on some standardized TOS formats.<p>The D* core devs BANNED me from their CENTRALIZED forums for podmins, including their Discourse channel, their Github issues system, and their reddit sub. Apparently discussions about moderation are a bannable offense for these guys, and they are ADAMANT that there will NEVER be any effective network-wide system for preventing child-pornography abuse being posted to their network.<p>I would suggest that if YCombinator still owns shares in the Diaspora Foundation, they should consider rescinding ownership of those shares, and potentially suing the Diaspora Foundation for their money back. YCombinator should not be an unwilling share-owner of a child-porn sharing network.
======
Carpetsmoker
Do you have links to the GitHub issue and other discussions that you were
banned for?

Edit: found one:
[https://github.com/diaspora/diaspora/issues/7866](https://github.com/diaspora/diaspora/issues/7866)

------
sierdolij
This is the problem of decentralized, too open systems (aka anarchy): it
enables terrorism, child porn, violent hate groups, organized crime and other
extremists and criminals. There needs to be a reputation system and stronger
limits to gradually give a user more access. Also, if they're required to pay
for what they use (micropayment) to keep resources on servers, they're less
likely to post illegal junk. Otherwise, crazy jerks will turn a free service
into a Tragedy of the Commons, and everyone loses. We need more user-
supported, non-profit sensible social media, productivity and other web apps
to replace the for-profit and the wild-west ones that don't scale so well
without major work. That being said, free often becomes junk because there's
not the focus and professionalism to make something cool.

TL;DR - free doesn't scale without meaningful accountability

~~~
Todamont
I see it as a problem of moderation, which is notoriously tricky to do fairly,
for any individual, and when you get a roomfull of techno-libertarians
together it becomes insurmountable to reach consensus on the process. My
takeaway is that federated networks need a federated moderation system, and
they will become segmented when the "good" actors essentially ban / disconnect
from the "bad" actors or just the uninitiated. So moderation systems maybe
need to be centralized to some degree to be effective. I've reached out to the
CEO of YCombinator, and the Youth Pastor of YCombinator about this, I'm
looking forward to hearing their responses. I've also reached out to the
Software Freedom Law Center, the group that oversees the Free Software Support
Network of which the Diaspora Foundation is a part of, and I'll be urging them
to take action against Diaspora Foundation also. I have just completed a tip
to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, letting them know
about Diaspora's little CP problem. My buddy from the Wall Street Journal
seems interested now too :)

~~~
zzzcpan
There is no problem of moderation in decentralized systems, never was and
never will be. Any system already assumes that you don't subscribe, follow or
participate in things and communities you don't want to and you discover,
choose and filter all the things you want yourself. That's how everything in
the world works. Everything is inherently self moderated.

But there are actors who want to control the spread of information, have some
global censorship features in every system with censorship decisions delegated
to people who they can influence. These actors are also the ones who invented
CP problem to be able do whatever they want to any target with public
approval, like making bogus CP claims on anything that doesn't have a global
censorship system to force creation of one. They may even upload CP themselves
if necessary.

The good thing about ideologies though is that they do push people to protect
ideological beliefs. You can't just CP your way into censorship on people with
strong believes against censorship.

~~~
Todamont
If we're seeing CP on the network, there is MOST CERTAINLY a problem with the
moderation. It's literally INSANE to me that you don't get that.

~~~
zzzcpan
I think you are making false claims and now even false accusations of core
devs. There is no point continuing this discussion, it's clearly a smear
campaign.

~~~
Todamont
My claims are not false. You are defending a child sex trafficking network,
imho.

------
DanBC
You can report images of child sexual abuse to the Internet Watch Foundation,
an organisation who works with law enforcement internationally to remove these
images. [https://www.iwf.org.uk/](https://www.iwf.org.uk/)

~~~
Todamont
Thanks, I have filed a complaint with them now. I've also notified the
National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. I basically filed a
complaint naming the D* core devs as potentially involved in child sex
trafficking. That's very disturbing to me.

~~~
awaywopassd
Sure they should address this but this is a bit crazy.

~~~
Todamont
Why do you think it's crazy for me to file criminal reports about CP that I
saw on the Diaspora Network? Should I just ignore that kind of thing, you
think? I just submitted a tip to the FBI.

------
trev-dev
I spent about a month or so tinkering with Diaspora and I feel your pain.
Wherever free speech is paramount, it comes at a price. Some people feel that
free speech and free "expression" shouldn't be free. I have rarely circled
back to my Diaspora account since discovering similar disturbing
images/messages.

If it's helpful to you, there are many other decentralized networks. So far as
I can tell, Mastodon has better moderation controls that can block entire
instances. It doesn't stop bad things from happening. The only confort I can
gleam from that is that those who do/say terrible stuff do so at the risk of
being seen and discovered.

------
Todamont
I couldn't find the discourse discussions I started, apparently they deleted
them when they banned me from discourse, for 1000 years.

Here's an interesting discussion where they talk about how users shouldn't be
banned from discourse / loomio, which I found interesting, though:

[https://discourse.diasporafoundation.org/t/banning-users-
fro...](https://discourse.diasporafoundation.org/t/banning-users-from-
loomio/371/12)

------
Todamont
Here you go!

[https://github.com/diaspora/diaspora/issues/7865](https://github.com/diaspora/diaspora/issues/7865)

[https://github.com/diaspora/diaspora/issues/7866](https://github.com/diaspora/diaspora/issues/7866)

~~~
Todamont
[https://github.com/diaspora/diaspora/issues/7464](https://github.com/diaspora/diaspora/issues/7464)

And this one :) This is the thread they said was relevant to the discussion
and that I should comment on, and then they banned me for "spamming" their
issues ticket system when I commented on it.

~~~
mcv
I don't think it's discussing moderation that got you banned, but spamming
github issues about it. A single issue should suffice. I can't verify it, but
they refer to you spamming their discourse too.

That said, I'd expect a discussion on this topic to be welcomed. The only
reason they could reasonably be annoyed by you is if you keep rehashing points
they've already discussed.

In that case, the right approach would be to read and understand how their
current moderation tools work, the reasons why they work that way, and their
reasons for not doing the thing you propose. If they don't address your
concerns, state your case clearly and unambiguously (in one github issue you
seemed to be arguing for centralised moderation, which is obviously not going
to happen; emphasise that it's a voluntary choice for podmins who don't want
to manually block repeat offenders) and explain why their current system
doesn't address this.

That said, Diaspora development seems to be incredibly slow, so maybe they're
not very eager to add completely new features that not many people are
interested in. Understand that if you're not going to write this code, it's
probably not going to happen.

But if childporn is really clearly a problem, and Diaspora is clearly
unwilling to address the issue by considering tools to help podmins, then
posting on a blog of your own could be a good way to initiate that discussion
in a way that they can't block.

~~~
Todamont
"Spamming" issue tickets? You mean leaving comments? "Spam" is an unsolicited
advertisement for a product or service, I DEFINITELY did not do that, so I
think you should be more precise with your language. They don't have a Terms
of Service that says you are not allowed to make comments on issue tickets, so
I did not violate any terms of service. IMHO "spamming" is the excuse that all
censors use, when they censor you.

~~~
vonmoltke
"Spam" is any sort of unwanted communications. Whether or not it is
advertising anything is irrelevant.

------
vfclists
You used a headline grabbing/clickbait title such as _Diaspora Foundation: A
Child Porn Sharing Neywork_ , in order to draw attention to a lack of a
federated moderation system in the Diaspora network system.

In my view this alone would be a good reason for you to be banned and cast out
from those groups. FWIW I am not involved in those groups and I don't even
know what happens in them, but the fact that you used such a title to draw
attention to your cause shows that you have a cause which is not compatible
with their ethos and other such decentralized systems.

Decentralized networks have arisen in response to centralized and privately
controlled services like Twitter, Youtube, Facebook, Paypal and Patreon which
use they term _hate speech_ , _neo-nazi_ , _populist_ as excuses to ban those
whose political and social views they disagree with, and you seriously expect
them to adopt some sort of centralized control system. Good luck to you.

The same can be said of the TOR network, which seems to have become a system
abused by all kinds of shady operators, with child pornography networks,
bitcoin extortionists, Islamist propaganda networks among those operating
behind the anonymity it offers.. Are there any calls for some kind OPTIONAL
federated moderation systems for the TOR network?

How about Cloudflare, which has also come under criticism for protecting shady
actors?

As for the child porn issue, the Internet itself can be seen as a child porn
network irrespective of what tools or services are used to access it, and the
same can be said about its so called relationship with _hate speech_. As
Jordan Peterson asks, who defines what _hate speech_ is?

As for the OPTIONAL part, things which are optional eventually morph into
mandatory systems, with the possibility of operators who don't subscribe to
such services being blocked simply for not using it..

Take a look at an organization such as Spamhaus, a supposedly optional but
privately owned and controlled service, all the criticism and complaints of
their abuse and misuse of a power over the years, and ask yourself why an
organization committed to decentralized communication woud want such as system
at the core of the services it provides.

I say this again, good luck to you!!

~~~
Todamont
Hey buddy, I'm seeing a ton of CP on the D* network. Maybe that's cool with
you, but to me, it means that the D* network is a place for disseminating CP
and potentially a place where child sex trafficking is occuring. Thats not
sensationalism. If you think people should be banned for comments about
moderation, I would suggest you don't understand the difference between fair
moderation and censorship. Or maybe you just think CP is cool huh? Are you one
of the D* core devs, is that why you are defending this network where child
sex abuse pictures are being posted every day?

IMHO people who scream CENSORSHIP when you start talking about removing CP and
going after child predators, are usually child predators.

~~~
vfclists
This is precisely the attitude which would probably get you banned, and I
would ban you for such an attitude. You titled your post with CP and switched
to neo-nazis who kept moving around when they were banned or blocked, the
switched back to CP on the networks.

You didn't write about CP posters that you blocked or banned only for them
switch to other pods. Any reason for that omission? You see, insinuations can
work both ways.

The truth is you want moderation for other things besides CP, and you are
using CP to draw attention to your cause.

You are already making insinuations like:

> "Or maybe you just think CP is cool huh? Are you one of the D* core devs, is
> that why you are defending this network where child sex abuse pictures are
> being posted every day?"

> "IMHO people who scream CENSORSHIP when you start talking about removing CP
> and going after child predators, are usually child predators."

Your behaviour is like some militant activists and SJWs who vilify and impugn
people innocent people for no other reason that they don't share their views
or subscribe to their causes. You might as well say that people who support
and defend the 2nd amendment right to bear arms support mass murderers who go
on killing sprees line Sandy Hook etc, and enjoy seeing the aftermath of such
events on television. Do you characterize all defenders of the second
amendment in that manner?

The whole point of decentralization is to avoid the very kind of controls you
seek to have implemented. In any case the proper thing to do is for end users
to have the kind of software that screens out users they don't like. If end
users want to share their lists that is fine, centralizing the process without
total transparency and accountability defeats the very idea of decentralized
networks. There is no such thing has having your cake and eating it.

stevenicr has already made some comments along such lines, but without a
transparent process which allows users final control on what they see or
cannot receive you are bound to wind up in the Spamhaus situation. The end
user must have the final say.

Since it is also a software issue, have you considered forking the software
and implementing the changes you want, and letting pod administrators choose
which software they prefer? That is a saner approach than casting innuendo
about the software developers.

~~~
Todamont
If you think people should be banned from discussions because of their
"attitudes" regarding moderation, you don't understand the difference between
moderation and censorship, and you are advocating censorship.

> I would ban you for such an attitude.

Well, then you are a would-be censor, and it's a good thing you can't ban
everyone everywhere, or else the whole world would fall silent and the only
sound would be of your waxing nonsense. All those "spammers" with their "spam"
complaints about CP, amirite?

If you think people should be banned from discussions because they won't stop
complaining about all the CP on the network and how they can't legally run a
pod anymore, well that's the attitude I'd expect from a CP network admin.

~~~
vfclists
Dude I think I have offered the proper solution to your problem.

You have made your suggestions, they have been ignored and you have been
banned from the relevant discussion groups.

It is quite obvious that the solution is a software issue, that what you want
is a change to the software.

Then what you have to do is to seek out some like-minded pod administrators,
have some discussions with them, gather whatever necessary resources required
to fork the software and get going.

The software is open source, isn't it?

That is a whole lot better than accusing some software developers of aiding
and abetting the distribution of CP, which can be said of the whole of the
Internet itself.

~~~
Todamont
I'm accusing them of aiding and abetting the distribution of CP because that's
EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE DOING, that's why they have a network with tons of CP on
it RIGHT NOW.

> hey you know what you should do with this CP platform? FORK IT!!!

LOL, no. I have no interest in working on the D* project, ever again, my focus
has now turned towards working with law enforcement to hold them accountable
for aiding and abetting distribution of CP.

If the Diaspora Foundation wants to insult and ban podmins who complain about
CP, then it's only logical that the response of those podmins should be to
start criminal CP complaints against them.

------
vfclists
What is D _?

What is the Diaspora Foundation?

How does the Diaspora Foundation differ from the Diaspora software?

Does deploying the software make you automatically a member of D_ and the
Diaspora Foundation?

~~~
Todamont
No, I think you would have to be like added to their github group to be
considered a "member" of the D* foundation. It used to be a private company
but then it turned into a non-profit thing with volunteer coders. From what I
can tell there are maybe 5 or 6 active devs, and they have NO PROBLEM
WHATSOEVER with the amount of CP on their network, and NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER
blatantly censoring anyone who suggests a plan of action to stop the CP from
being posted to their network. It seems to me that they may be PROTECTING
their CP network from public view and legal scrutiny.

