this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2024
303 points (88.9% liked)

Fediverse

28731 readers
214 users here now

A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).

If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!

Rules

Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration), Search Lemmy

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
ruud@lemmy.world
Xylinna@lemmy.world
MrCenny@lemmy.world
TragicNotCute@lemmy.world
automodbeta@lemmy.world
woelkchen@lemmy.world
303
Lemmy's Image Problem (Updated 02-06-2024) (wedistribute.org)
submitted 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) by deadsuperhero@lemmy.world to c/fediverse@lemmy.world
202 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Highlighting the recent report of users and admins being unable to delete images, and how Trust & Safety tooling is currently lacking.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

There are zero obligations towards the people actively using the software.

Yes, there are, and that obligation is to not publish something as production ready if it is illegal to use because of how it's built.

I'm a software developer, I understand exactly how frustrating user demands are, that was still a completely and utterly unacceptable way to respond to a very politely worded request for software that literally just doesn't break privacy laws to run.

As the commenter pointed out, if you don't want to fix it, fine, but then you absolutely have a moral, ethical, and professional obligation to document that clearly in your README.md.

[–] CeeBee@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Yes, there are, and that obligation is to not publish something as production ready if it is illegal to use because of how it's built.

No, there really isn't. Do I feel that project owners should follow good practices for maintaining clean code that also allows users to keep things legal? Absolutely I do.

But that is not the same thing as an obligation. If there was a single cent exchanged between the devs and anyone else (donations do not count) then this conversation would be entirely different.

I don't agree with the devs' stance. But it is 100% their prerogative to say no. It's their project, not ours.

I'm a software developer, I understand exactly how frustrating user demands are

As am I.

that was still a completely and utterly unacceptable way to respond to a very politely worded request

I agree.

As the commenter pointed out, if you don't want to fix it, fine, but then you absolutely have a moral, ethical, and professional obligation to document that clearly in your README.md.

No, you absolutely do not. Although I do somewhat agree on the professional part, but it's still not an obligation. It's completely unprofessional, but that's different than it being an obligation.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca -2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The word obligation is not as narrow as you're using it:

obligation /ŏb″lĭ-gā′shən/

noun A social, legal, or moral requirement, such as a duty, contract, or promise, that compels one to follow or avoid a particular course of action. "Are you able to meet your obligations?" "I have an obligation to attend their wedding."

Does he have a contractual obligation? No, no contracts were signed. Does he have a legal obligation? No, the license file in the project absolves him of legal liability.

But he absolutely has a moral, social, and professional obligation to do so.

[–] CeeBee@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If you want to apply such a better definition, then you have an obligation to learn Rust and submit a PR to bring the project into compliance. You have a societal obligation since you are aware of the issue and use Lemmy.

You owe it to your fellow Lemmites. Lemurs? Lemmings? Whatever the term for a Lemmy user is.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

All I have an obligation to do is give back to society, and I do so through taking care of my parents and grandparents, volunteering teaching classes every weekend at the community center, volunteering to upgrade and maintain an app for a non profit, donating to charity, open source projects and news organizations, helping my elderly neighbours with their snow and leaf clearing, etc.

And if you find one of my open source github projects will cause a user to violate a local law, kindly file an issue and I'll immediately update the README.md and take it down until the issue is fixed.

[–] CeeBee@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

And if you find one of my github projects that will cause a user to violate a local law, kindly file an issue and I'll update the README.md / consider taking it down until the issue is fixed.

100% your prerogative.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Nope, it's my moral, ethical, and social obligation as a person, my professional obligation as a professional software developer, and if I had bothered to file the paper work for my engineering license, would also be my legal obligation as an engineer.

[–] CeeBee@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Again, 100% your prerogative. No one is forced to use any of your software. The only time you must fix it is if you have a contract that outlines those conditions or you are selling licenses to customers in the EU.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Again, you are narrowing the definition of "obligation" to just legal and contractual.

If you just want to think about yourself and how you interact with the world through legal and contractual terms, good luck, it will be hard and miserable and you will be disliked. Otherwise you do have moral, ethical, and social obligations for everything you put into society.