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

  • masterspace@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    We’re not talking about a user demanding you release a flatpak build targeting their personal linux distribution running in a VM’d WSL, we’re talking about a consumer facing social app that doesn’t include the functionality for a user to delete something they added.

    You know what the acronym used for describing the most basic functional web app api is?

    CRUD - Create, Read, Update, Delete

    • CeeBee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      we’re talking about a consumer facing social app

      What we’re talking about is a complete free and open source project that’s built and maintained completely through volunteer labour.

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

      While I agree that the functionality should exist, the devs can literally do whatever they want. Nobody is paying them.

      Edit: you’re also seeing only a single instance of a conversation. I can guarantee that the devs have been dealing with asinine and demanding users for a while now. There comes a point where your patience wears thin.

      • masterspace@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          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
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            8 months ago

            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
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              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
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                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
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  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
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    8 months ago

                    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.

    • pop@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      8 months ago

      You seem to know what you are talking about. Have you made a pull request yet?

      • masterspace@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Have you learned how to program to fix the problem?

        It doesn’t seem worth my time to learn Rust just to submit a PR to devs who behave like that, they’ll just reject it and be pithy, like they are when a user asks them to comply with EU privacy law.

        • CeeBee@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          It doesn’t seem worth my time to learn Rust just to submit a PR to devs who behave like that

          Ya, this is exactly the attitude that burns out devs and kills projects. Congrats for being super entitled towards a free project.

          • masterspace@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            It is not entitled to expect a published project to comply with basic privacy legislation and not be illegal to use.

            If your bar for this project is that much below basic consumer expectations, then this project was always going to fail.

            • CeeBee@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              It is not entitled to expect a published project to comply with basic privacy legislation and not be illegal to use.

              No it’s not. But what is entitlement is bombarding voluntary devs with garbage requests. Is this particular issue entitlement? No. But having seen the various requests made over the last year or so there’s a breaking point where a person gets overly sensitive.

              Think of being pestered ALL day at work over garbage and having an all around bad day. Then on the way home you jump into a store to pick something up and someone says something annoying but ultimately innocuous to you. Some people can handle it in stride, some people’s nerves get frayed.

              I’m not excusing the devs here. I don’t actually know what their thoughts are. But from personal experience in the dev world and from what I’ve seen, it looks to me like they’re getting frustrated by users.

              And they might be in a region where the privacy concerns don’t apply to them. And I agree that it’s a problem, but ultimately it’s their right and prerogative to not implement.

              Remember, absolutely no one here has paid a single CENT to the devs for their work (not talking about donations).

              So complaining about the quality of their work while you are benefiting from it for free is literally entitlement.

              • masterspace@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                I understand having frayed nerves, I even understand snapping at someone because you’re having a bad day, and I do feel sympathy for the devs, and wouldn’t hold this against them (especially since they’re at least providing a nuke everything option that will address it).

                But the line between entitlement and reasonable expectation is not one of monetary compensation.

                Engineering ethics does not let you off the hook just because no one paid you to build what you built. If an engineer goes to the park and unilaterally builds a playground that doesn’t meet basic legislated safety standards and kills a kid, they’re not off the hook. They will be investigated by their professional body and have their license revoked.

                Hell if they just build a playground off in the woods on their own private land but don’t take reasonable steps to prevent kids from accessing or using it then they will have their license revoked.

                • gregorum@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  Your failure to provide a reliable source for your claims is not my problem.

                  If you cannot provide a reliable source of your claims, your claim will be dismissed.

                • CeeBee@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Hell if they just build a playground off in the woods on their own private land but don’t take reasonable steps to prevent kids from accessing or using it then they will have their license revoked.

                  Sure, but if you want to extend the analogy that far, then the devs are just posting free plans online on how to build a playground. It’s the instance owners who physically build the “playground” and are liable.

                  • masterspace@lemmy.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    8 months ago

                    Again, that does not matter. If an engineer published those plans online and you built it and your kid died they would have their license revoked and face likely criminal liability.

          • Maalus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Is it entitlement if it’s making using the entire thing illegal everywhere? Since there is no tooling to block traffic from the EU / not federate with instances that don’t comply with GDPR?

            • CeeBee@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              Is it entitlement if it’s making using the entire thing illegal everywhere?

              No. It’s the dev’s project. They can do whatever they want with it. They can delete the repo and go live in the woods if they want.

              To be clear, I don’t agree with the stance they have taken. But I also see the kind of reactions there are far from what people are making it out to be. I think the people complaining about the devs being “mean” are just hypersensitive and have never been told “no” their whole lives.

              Like I said, I disagree with the devs’ position to not implement this feature. It’s been highly requested, and for good reason. But this is a free project. If they say no, then it’s no. If we don’t like that decision, then maybe we need to move somewhere else.

              It sucks but sometimes that’s life.

              • Maalus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                I don’t care if they are mean. The app isn’t GDPR compliant. That’s what matters.

                • CeeBee@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Fine, that’s what matters. Then ask them to implement it or write it yourself.

                  And if they say no, then that’s your answer and Lemmy instances within the EU will need to move out of the EU or just shut down.

                  • Maalus@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    8 months ago

                    They can’t be in the EU or the US. That cuts like 99% of them off. That’s exactly my point - they don’t want to implement something that makes the app illegal with 99% of the userbase being from there.