Meta's decentralized social plans confirmed. Is Embrace-Extend-Extinguish of the Fediverse next?

Helix@beehaw.org to Technology@beehaw.org – 227 points –
reb00ted.org
229

You are viewing a single comment

Why is this a bad thing? With all the email analogies, it’s a good thing to have bigger corporations involved

One issue with emails is that it's actually very difficult to self host email servers now as most of the bigger servers would automatically block unknown servers due to spam

And some clients only support gmail, outlook, and a couple other big ones.

Exactly, I have given up on hosting my own. I now just pay for a decent email provider.

Pretty much the entire bdsm community everywhere was outed on Facebook because folks carried cellphones to events and Facebook started suggesting friends to one another. Fifteen years ago privacy was sacrosanct and no one shared real life names unless they were very close. Now there is no point to trying to keep your identity secret and it sounds silly to introduce yourself as "Master Darkness" or whatever. I mean it sounded silly then, too, but everyone understood the necessity and it was situationally appropriate.

That is the danger of these large corporations. They aren't looking to serve the broad community - they are looking to exploit our social graph for profit regardless of the destruction in their wake.

To me this sounds like us de-federating them early on to avoid them de-federating us. It’s an open framework enabling multi domain interoperability. As long as fediverse rules aren’t violated no one should get defederated imo

Again tbh, I don’t really think Meta needs Fediverse. They already have Facebook and Instagram. All they need is add one link and they’ll have way more users than the Fediverse has in a matter of hours

I'm not against corporations wanting to set up their own instance for their own employees for them to interact with the Fediverse. I'm against data-collection, targeted advertisements, and corporate control.