Meta's decentralized social plans confirmed. Is Embrace-Extend-Extinguish of the Fediverse next?Helix@beehaw.org to Technology@beehaw.org – 227 points – 1 years agoreb00ted.org229Post a CommentPreviewYou are viewing a single commentView all commentsShow the parent comment We have the power over ActivityPub Who is 'we'? And who doesn't say that there's something on top of activitypub? Plus, if they do create cool features, why would we not also add them? Because we don't have multiple thousands of paid developers.@Helix we have a legion of trans coders in pink striped programmer socks. They can do anything!One of the "powers" of OSS is that the license usually required changes to be fed back upstream. If Meta were not to do that the authors of Lemmy could ask someone like EFF to take legal proceeding against them.Facebook can easily circumvent most requirements like that if the license isn't invasivively copyleft. Usually web standards have permissive licenses.i'm not sure if ActivityPub is copyleft or not. meta might be able to build proprietary features on top of it if the license isn't viral.If it is copyleft, they will probably try to reimplement it permissively. Because we don't have multiple thousands of paid developers. Having worked at a company with thousands of developers, that's a significant advantage for us.
We have the power over ActivityPub Who is 'we'? And who doesn't say that there's something on top of activitypub? Plus, if they do create cool features, why would we not also add them? Because we don't have multiple thousands of paid developers.@Helix we have a legion of trans coders in pink striped programmer socks. They can do anything!One of the "powers" of OSS is that the license usually required changes to be fed back upstream. If Meta were not to do that the authors of Lemmy could ask someone like EFF to take legal proceeding against them.Facebook can easily circumvent most requirements like that if the license isn't invasivively copyleft. Usually web standards have permissive licenses.i'm not sure if ActivityPub is copyleft or not. meta might be able to build proprietary features on top of it if the license isn't viral.If it is copyleft, they will probably try to reimplement it permissively. Because we don't have multiple thousands of paid developers. Having worked at a company with thousands of developers, that's a significant advantage for us.
One of the "powers" of OSS is that the license usually required changes to be fed back upstream. If Meta were not to do that the authors of Lemmy could ask someone like EFF to take legal proceeding against them.Facebook can easily circumvent most requirements like that if the license isn't invasivively copyleft. Usually web standards have permissive licenses.i'm not sure if ActivityPub is copyleft or not. meta might be able to build proprietary features on top of it if the license isn't viral.If it is copyleft, they will probably try to reimplement it permissively.
Facebook can easily circumvent most requirements like that if the license isn't invasivively copyleft. Usually web standards have permissive licenses.
i'm not sure if ActivityPub is copyleft or not. meta might be able to build proprietary features on top of it if the license isn't viral.If it is copyleft, they will probably try to reimplement it permissively.
Because we don't have multiple thousands of paid developers. Having worked at a company with thousands of developers, that's a significant advantage for us.
Who is 'we'? And who doesn't say that there's something on top of activitypub?
Because we don't have multiple thousands of paid developers.
@Helix we have a legion of trans coders in pink striped programmer socks. They can do anything!
One of the "powers" of OSS is that the license usually required changes to be fed back upstream.
If Meta were not to do that the authors of Lemmy could ask someone like EFF to take legal proceeding against them.
Facebook can easily circumvent most requirements like that if the license isn't invasivively copyleft. Usually web standards have permissive licenses.
i'm not sure if ActivityPub is copyleft or not. meta might be able to build proprietary features on top of it if the license isn't viral.
If it is copyleft, they will probably try to reimplement it permissively.
Having worked at a company with thousands of developers, that's a significant advantage for us.