If you think the only reason to use a self-hosted social network is if you want to circumvent the laws, you're making the same argument as only wanting privacy if you've got something to hide. YouTube ran an algorithm to delete "extremist videos" and accidentally irreversibly deleted a bunch of historical evidence of destruction of Syrian historical sites. Shit like that happens all the time when someone else is in charge.
Speak of the devil:
YouTube Bans Award-Winning Animated Short (because of nudity)
@Gargron the producers should have stuck to gratuitous bloody carnage, that always gets a pass.
Link me a few more cases like this and I might be able to put together a Medium article about the dangers of centralized monopolies
@Gargron an article about the dangers of centralized monopolies on Medium would likely spontaneously combust
@Gargron leaded gasoline was considered a net good for a long ass time (but I fully support your choosing which battles to fight and agree that your time would be poorly spent railing against Medium with your current workload)
@Gargron including the:
—in general, youtube is horrible too.
@gargron was it irreversibly deleted? That aside, I still can't wrap my head around people having the only copies of their videos on youtube or their photos on google photos. Back to the analogy of 'hey neighbor, can I store my stuff in your garage for free indefinately?'
for many it's more "hey neighbor, you're welcome to store your interesting stuff in our museum/art gallery, we've got a massive storage space & revenue model to support it." -> "oh, we're getting hit from our advertisers about content, gotta burn all this stuff. Sorry Neighbor!".
Especially when some people have paid business accounts being affected, it gets interesting.
It's been a slow burn: https://twitter.com/vihartvihart/status/674030681211572224