There is zero benefit to engaging with multi-billion dollar companies.
The harm is they embrace, extend, extinguish the Fediverse and I can easily see the W3C letting them donate and start putting in some features “to protect” the children or media ownership rights or whatever bogus excuse they’ll use to start cracking down on it like every company does every time it gets involved in something.
But then if other instances don't want those features, isn't the worst that can happen that instances just de-federate from Threads? I know the history of EEE, but I don't see how that can even work here.
But then if other instances don't want those features
In other words, if other instances don't want to have compatibility with the popular instances -- hence the issue.
That's not really an issue though; or at least, I'm not yet convinced it's one. We're here because we don't want to have compatibility with Reddit, and I'm on Mastodon because I don't want to have compatibility with Twitter.
We're here
Are we though? Because it looks like you're on kbin and I'm on slrpnk.
If either one of our instances decides to implement proprietary features that Threads creates (the second E in EEE) and the other one doesn't, that could break the experience of us being "here" together.
And we're free to move to another instance that has the access, or lack thereof, that we want.
Yup, thus fragmenting the crap out of the fediverse (the last E)
I always saw that as a feature, not a bug. The feature that prevents it from being the last E.
If you see massive fragmentation as a feature then I really don't know what to tell you.
I guess enjoy?
I'm a Linux user. That "fragmentation" is probably a good reason for why that hasn't been extinguished either. So as far as I can tell, yes, I'll enjoy the resilience that that implies without fear of it being extinguished.
I really don't think that's a meaningful comparison.
Federation relies on unity -- fragmentation ruins that.
Well, you can stick to instances that federate with Threads even if/when they misbehave then, but having the option not to is pretty great, from my perspective.
Sure, that's great while it's still just "instances that do federate with threads" and "instances that don't federate with threads".
Yes if certain instances don't like Threads they can de-federate from it, and I'm sure a few will, Personally I think it should be down to user choice as the users on Threads aren't to bad it's the company that is.
low quality content ._.
the users on Threads aren't to bad
Ehhhh...
The only benefit is that the Fediverse will have potentially more users as well as companies possibly following in METAs steps and integrating ActivityPub. This is a beneficial step for the internet but only time will tell how it actually plays out.
More companies is the opposite of beneficial for the Internet.
We need a people oriented Internet.
Yes I get that but the only way people will feel like they can move across is by other bigger 'projects' being made like Threads that integrate and teach people the basics of the Fediverse before they possibly push off to Mastodon, Lemmy, Kbin, PixelFed, Ext.
This is a good step even if the people behind it are terrible hopefully having people interact with other communities will push people to move over to them instead of being in control of META or other big companies.
Growth is already steady, and the more these companies shoot themselves in the foot the more large migration waves we get.
Slightly speeding up an already naturally occurring process doesn’t seem worth the risks of allowing corps into our spaces.
The problem is there's only so far that the general userbase will grow without the fall off big tech, the only one that is close to falling is X formally Twitter and I don't think most people want those sorts of people on here, not yet at least.
Sure you might be right in the way of the Fediverse growing but either way big tech is goanna want to join the Fediverse sooner or later, we might as well try and get as many users to jump the Big Tech ship and move to these platforms.
There is zero benefit to engaging with multi-billion dollar companies.
The harm is they embrace, extend, extinguish the Fediverse and I can easily see the W3C letting them donate and start putting in some features “to protect” the children or media ownership rights or whatever bogus excuse they’ll use to start cracking down on it like every company does every time it gets involved in something.
But then if other instances don't want those features, isn't the worst that can happen that instances just de-federate from Threads? I know the history of EEE, but I don't see how that can even work here.
In other words, if other instances don't want to have compatibility with the popular instances -- hence the issue.
That's not really an issue though; or at least, I'm not yet convinced it's one. We're here because we don't want to have compatibility with Reddit, and I'm on Mastodon because I don't want to have compatibility with Twitter.
Are we though? Because it looks like you're on kbin and I'm on slrpnk.
If either one of our instances decides to implement proprietary features that Threads creates (the second E in EEE) and the other one doesn't, that could break the experience of us being "here" together.
And we're free to move to another instance that has the access, or lack thereof, that we want.
Yup, thus fragmenting the crap out of the fediverse (the last E)
I always saw that as a feature, not a bug. The feature that prevents it from being the last E.
If you see massive fragmentation as a feature then I really don't know what to tell you.
I guess enjoy?
I'm a Linux user. That "fragmentation" is probably a good reason for why that hasn't been extinguished either. So as far as I can tell, yes, I'll enjoy the resilience that that implies without fear of it being extinguished.
I really don't think that's a meaningful comparison.
Federation relies on unity -- fragmentation ruins that.
Well, you can stick to instances that federate with Threads even if/when they misbehave then, but having the option not to is pretty great, from my perspective.
Sure, that's great while it's still just "instances that do federate with threads" and "instances that don't federate with threads".
Yes if certain instances don't like Threads they can de-federate from it, and I'm sure a few will, Personally I think it should be down to user choice as the users on Threads aren't to bad it's the company that is.
low quality content ._.
Ehhhh...
The only benefit is that the Fediverse will have potentially more users as well as companies possibly following in METAs steps and integrating ActivityPub. This is a beneficial step for the internet but only time will tell how it actually plays out.
More companies is the opposite of beneficial for the Internet.
We need a people oriented Internet.
Yes I get that but the only way people will feel like they can move across is by other bigger 'projects' being made like Threads that integrate and teach people the basics of the Fediverse before they possibly push off to Mastodon, Lemmy, Kbin, PixelFed, Ext.
This is a good step even if the people behind it are terrible hopefully having people interact with other communities will push people to move over to them instead of being in control of META or other big companies.
Growth is already steady, and the more these companies shoot themselves in the foot the more large migration waves we get.
Slightly speeding up an already naturally occurring process doesn’t seem worth the risks of allowing corps into our spaces.
The problem is there's only so far that the general userbase will grow without the fall off big tech, the only one that is close to falling is X formally Twitter and I don't think most people want those sorts of people on here, not yet at least.
Sure you might be right in the way of the Fediverse growing but either way big tech is goanna want to join the Fediverse sooner or later, we might as well try and get as many users to jump the Big Tech ship and move to these platforms.