Meta and Mastodon: What’s really on people’s minds?

giallo@beehaw.org to Technology@beehaw.org – 52 points –
Meta and Mastodon – What’s really on people’s minds?
ianbetteridge.com

A very detailed article about the whole Meta (Instagram/Threads) vs. Fediverse discussions. It's a long read, but well-worth it if you're interested in the subject.

29

You are viewing a single comment

Just yesterday i was seeing this comment by one of the Calckey maintainers. pasting here for the lazy the relevant bit:

Okay, if your community can’t survive Meta using ActivityPub, then it doesn’t deserve to exist.

I frankly cannot fathom how can somebody be so blind to how odious it is. And yeah, when called up on it he also fell into "But the protocol!" arguments, which seems to be the take people holding the pro-Meta arguments are holding. They just don't realize that this is not a technical problem but a social one, it's not about the marvelous internet machine, but about the people that rely on it. Like Treebeard said, "a mind of metal and wheels".

"then it doesn't deserve to exist"

When I hear that, I hear an implicit value judgement with Meta as the standard. The value of an instance is in if it can survive against a social aggregation to Meta's instance. Only then is it worthy of existing, if it can compete with the degree of funding, advertising, and account creation streamlining that we would expect from a social media platform giant.

When I hear that, I hear that small, self-hosted instances don't deserve to exist.

The counter argument is that standardized open protocols are important. So if a big corporation moves to adopt a standardized open protocol, it's a good thing for everyone, even if said corporation is sketchy, evil, or whatever.

It's kind of like Microsoft's adoption of XML for Office save files. Yes, they had ulterior motives, and the result isn't completely satisfactory for third parties who want to parse the save data. But it's still miles better than the previous situation where things were completely closed off.

That sounds like a very naive view on part of that developer. He probably never heard of Microsoft’s „Embrace, extend, and extinguish“ approach. This is going to be similar with Facebook. They have a lot more resources than all current instances combined and can provide a much better user experience. They are going to be the main instance on the federated network slowly starting to extend it and support features others lack. Making it a unique selling point until it’s too late.

And that’s not even looking at the moral/ethical standpoint of getting involved with Meta.