I'm surprised it's taking them so long. It seems like it shouldn't be that much of a technical challenge for an organization with Meta's resources, especially when it was planned before the service even launched.
They might be talking about data harvesting and revenue generation driven from federated sources.
If you mean from the Fediverse side, it's not really possible. At least not from Mastodon.
People have this misunderstanding, if they add ads, it will be for users of #threads, other servers will not see the ad. What about if they inject an ad to every post? That would make no sense, their income come from ads, but personalized ads, you probably hate them, but tons of people find them useful, besides they won't be able to have metrics for a wall of text or image at the bottom of every post for others in the #fediverse.
If your instance chooses to federate with them, how wouldn't it be possible for them to process that data?
From my post below:
"If you follow someone on threads, they'll only get your username, server name, profile pic, and server IP. That's the same thing any remote instance gets. They'll know if you like/share/comment on their content because you'd be telling them. Besides that, they can't know anything. They only interact directly with your server, so they won't even be able to tell if you see or click anything you're subscribed to. In order to track you, they'd have to get info from your server (that isn't collecting it to begin with). They also don't have a reliable way to connect the sliver of data collected to an identity to serve ads to.
Really, the only reason they can collect as much about their users as they do is that they control their servers."
At least not yet.
If you follow someone on threads, they'll only get your username, server name, profile pic, and server IP. That's the same thing any remote instance gets. They'll know if you like/share/comment on their content because you'd be telling them. Besides that, they can't know anything. They only interact directly with your server, so they won't even be able to tell if you see or click anything you're subscribed to. In order to track you, they'd have to get info from your server (that isn't collecting it to begin with). They also don't have a reliable way to connect the sliver of data collected to an identity to serve ads to.
Really, the only reason they can collect as much about their users as they do is that they control their servers.
Could be just tactics. Remember the uproar the first time it was said threads would federate? Suddenly they were "not ready yet".
Now in the second go, the idea got already normalized and there are more pro-meta comments. And they will stay silent and non-intrusive at the beginning.
Zuck is really big into early adaptation (metaverse i.e.), they see potential in the fediverse and their first objective is to be part of it, then grow with it and finally take advantage of it, once the time is right.
It's really not a good thing that some people think the fediverse is going to go up in flames as soon as meta joins. That's obviously not going to happen and sets wrong expectations that could lead to more acceptance.
I've not seen any pro meta posts. Unless this is meant in the same vein as those calling out Israel are portrayed as pro hamas wrongly. What I have seen is a lot of baseless speculation, and uninformed opinion being thrown around as fact.
We should definitely keep an eye on every capitalist or authoritarian. Because they'd gladly sacrifice our lives and privacy for a few dollars more. But anyone who thinks integrating their own servers is going to give them any more information than the servers already give anyone who asks. Has a flawed understanding of what is possible and likely.
This is all akin to the people who never used XMPP claiming Google killed it. Which is another bit of fear uncertainty and doubt being thrown out to stir people up in these threads as well. I have used XMPP consistently for the last 20+ years. I'm logged in this very minute. They just had a 2023 Google summer of code conclude.
We should watch meta like a hawk. And of course not give them special treatment. But they want to connect to us. We have the keys and the power if they don't want to play by the rules. We don't have to federate with them. They're going to collect the data regardless. But the enemy of our enemy can still be useful.
I do imagine they have a dirty trick in mind and I'm not sure what it is yet. Perhaps they aren't either.
There's also an opportunity though. Threads users will get exposed to open source, independently-hosted alternatives they wouldn't have heard about otherwise. Some of them will switch. If those projects can offer a better user experience than Threads, more of them will switch.
I suspect the angle is something around avoiding regulation, they were happy with the previous "we're just a platform" arrangement where they could hold their hands up and waive responsibility for the content and users on it. Now that's actively being remediated by various governments, I think they're hoping they can make claims of reduced responsibility for what's on their site if it can come from elsewhere in the fediverse.
I'm not sure about specifics, but my gut feeling is that this is the angle
I think if that's all there is to it, I'd be pretty happy with it. Governments can still attempt to regulate their use of algorithmic feeds regardless of the source of content.
With a service that size, they're gonna have to move slow, make sure things don't break, and try to minimize downtime.
I'm surprised it's taking them so long. It seems like it shouldn't be that much of a technical challenge for an organization with Meta's resources, especially when it was planned before the service even launched.
They might be talking about data harvesting and revenue generation driven from federated sources.
If you mean from the Fediverse side, it's not really possible. At least not from Mastodon.
People have this misunderstanding, if they add ads, it will be for users of #threads, other servers will not see the ad. What about if they inject an ad to every post? That would make no sense, their income come from ads, but personalized ads, you probably hate them, but tons of people find them useful, besides they won't be able to have metrics for a wall of text or image at the bottom of every post for others in the #fediverse.
If your instance chooses to federate with them, how wouldn't it be possible for them to process that data?
From my post below: "If you follow someone on threads, they'll only get your username, server name, profile pic, and server IP. That's the same thing any remote instance gets. They'll know if you like/share/comment on their content because you'd be telling them. Besides that, they can't know anything. They only interact directly with your server, so they won't even be able to tell if you see or click anything you're subscribed to. In order to track you, they'd have to get info from your server (that isn't collecting it to begin with). They also don't have a reliable way to connect the sliver of data collected to an identity to serve ads to.
Really, the only reason they can collect as much about their users as they do is that they control their servers."
At least not yet.
If you follow someone on threads, they'll only get your username, server name, profile pic, and server IP. That's the same thing any remote instance gets. They'll know if you like/share/comment on their content because you'd be telling them. Besides that, they can't know anything. They only interact directly with your server, so they won't even be able to tell if you see or click anything you're subscribed to. In order to track you, they'd have to get info from your server (that isn't collecting it to begin with). They also don't have a reliable way to connect the sliver of data collected to an identity to serve ads to.
Really, the only reason they can collect as much about their users as they do is that they control their servers.
Could be just tactics. Remember the uproar the first time it was said threads would federate? Suddenly they were "not ready yet".
Now in the second go, the idea got already normalized and there are more pro-meta comments. And they will stay silent and non-intrusive at the beginning.
Zuck is really big into early adaptation (metaverse i.e.), they see potential in the fediverse and their first objective is to be part of it, then grow with it and finally take advantage of it, once the time is right.
It's really not a good thing that some people think the fediverse is going to go up in flames as soon as meta joins. That's obviously not going to happen and sets wrong expectations that could lead to more acceptance.
I've not seen any pro meta posts. Unless this is meant in the same vein as those calling out Israel are portrayed as pro hamas wrongly. What I have seen is a lot of baseless speculation, and uninformed opinion being thrown around as fact.
We should definitely keep an eye on every capitalist or authoritarian. Because they'd gladly sacrifice our lives and privacy for a few dollars more. But anyone who thinks integrating their own servers is going to give them any more information than the servers already give anyone who asks. Has a flawed understanding of what is possible and likely.
This is all akin to the people who never used XMPP claiming Google killed it. Which is another bit of fear uncertainty and doubt being thrown out to stir people up in these threads as well. I have used XMPP consistently for the last 20+ years. I'm logged in this very minute. They just had a 2023 Google summer of code conclude.
We should watch meta like a hawk. And of course not give them special treatment. But they want to connect to us. We have the keys and the power if they don't want to play by the rules. We don't have to federate with them. They're going to collect the data regardless. But the enemy of our enemy can still be useful.
I do imagine they have a dirty trick in mind and I'm not sure what it is yet. Perhaps they aren't either.
There's also an opportunity though. Threads users will get exposed to open source, independently-hosted alternatives they wouldn't have heard about otherwise. Some of them will switch. If those projects can offer a better user experience than Threads, more of them will switch.
I suspect the angle is something around avoiding regulation, they were happy with the previous "we're just a platform" arrangement where they could hold their hands up and waive responsibility for the content and users on it. Now that's actively being remediated by various governments, I think they're hoping they can make claims of reduced responsibility for what's on their site if it can come from elsewhere in the fediverse.
I'm not sure about specifics, but my gut feeling is that this is the angle
I think if that's all there is to it, I'd be pretty happy with it. Governments can still attempt to regulate their use of algorithmic feeds regardless of the source of content.
With a service that size, they're gonna have to move slow, make sure things don't break, and try to minimize downtime.