Notices by Wolf480pl (wolf480pl@niu.moe), page 7

@sn0w Go ended at 1.6. Later versions are fanfic.

@alcinnz @strypey @RandomDamage you could remove the formatting, feed the text through keyword extraction algorithm, and then hash _that_ to get a DHT key

@alcinnz @strypey @RandomDamage well, I think DHTs are pretty good at removing duplicates :P

As for curated metadata, I'm not sure if I want it. I'd rather the search engine be predictable and unopinionated.

@strypey @RandomDamage yeah, you're right.
As I've already said, my rule works bad for search engines, but then I don't know any rule that'd work well for search engines. And while no-rule-at-all isn't perfect, I guess we'd need to settle with it for now, and add some exception for search engines, which'd open a can of interpretation worms, but such is life...

@strypey @RandomDamage
True, they're still dropping/putting on hold some stuff. In particular, sometimes they put on hold password reset emails. So I'd rather them do even less filtering.

@strypey @RandomDamage
I explicitly unchecked all "spam filtering" checkboxes in my email provider's settings. I do get .pdf.js attachments. And all kinds of spam that was previously filtered by the ISP.

@strypey @alcinnz @RandomDamage
no no, I mean, try setting up a yacy instance :P

@strypey @RandomDamage I don't want my email service to filter out spam. It has too many false-positives. I use client-side spam filtering instead.

@alcinnz @strypey @RandomDamage
Or P2P. I should give #YaCy another try...

@strypey @RandomDamage yeah...
But then, a search engine can have a lot of influence on other people by manipulating the search results it shows them.
I'd say it's worse than a publisher.

But I don't know how to force a search engine to not abuse its power, without making niche content unfindable.

@strypey @RandomDamage
"If you prioritize/moderate/curate/pick-the-best content, you're liable. If you treat all content equally, giving users what they've asked for and nothing more, you're not liable."

@strypey @RandomDamage
Then you don't open the envelope.
No public timeline, no recommended videos, and you're fine. Only show people something if they're already looking for it.

@strypey @RandomDamage AFAIK the VPS provider is liable unless the customer sends them a counter-notice, which they forward, together with customer's suing address, to the complainer. From that point on, the VPS provider is no longer liable, and the complainer can sue the customer.

@strypey @RandomDamage
IMO, from a practical POV, there's little difference between AWS EC2 and a traditional VPS. On AWS you still get an illusion of having your own operating system. Maybe you don't get to pick which kernel you use (though IIRC you can, at least some of the stuff they offer is full virtualization).
So even if it's not full virtualization, it's more like an OpenVZ VPS than a shared hosting.

@RandomDamage @strypey
FB shows you content you haven't subscribed to, so it'd be liable.

@RandomDamage @strypey
News channels are curated content.
They look into the content they have, and pick which one they're gonna broadcast.

@strypey @RandomDamage the text implies that it's the VPS provider that receives the takedown notice first, only forwarding it to the customer if they consider the notice valid.

@unfa well, ZFS would detect them as well, right?