Can someone ELI5 this situation to me? Not sure what Meta can do to instances/the Fediverse.
People are worried that they'll embrace, extend and extinguish it. That is, join the fediverse, make Threads a better client than any of the existing ones until everyone uses their client, then use that extra reach to harm the fediverse.
I'm personally not that worried, because of who we are. We're a bunch of geeks with anarchist leanings, and so probably wouldn't switch to Threads anyway.
Please remember the example of Microsoft and open source office document formats. And in the early days of Internet Explorer with HTML. The risk here is that Threads will embrace the fediverse for a bit. Then they will incorporate features that are only available in Threads that will bleed users away from the open source options. All the while vacuuming up user data for profit while having distain for user privacy. Why would we want to allow them to cast aside the privacy for only one of our users? Are we not going to act like stewards for open source and protection of user privacy?
This us exactly the threat. They'll start setting standards that other instances will be pressured to follow. Those standards will be ways to control the fediverse and make it a propietary data-gathering and sales/advertising platform just like everything else.
I am worried because I want and we need non geeks to be on lemmy as well for it to be great.
Yes. Diversity of thought is great. We can enjoy our nerdy echo chambers, but in the end we get outvoted IRL. We need to both know what's going on in the larger world, and we need some way to help educate. This theoretically allows the best of all worlds.
Conversely, I don't trust Facebook.
I really hope that we learnt our lesson with the other platforms and don't go blindly trusting mark fuckerburg with our federated platforms.
Yeah, I enjoy a ton of hobbies where a lot of the people that know their stuff aren't particularly computer savvy. If they're not on my platform because it is too technically complex, I'm probably going to at least visit the more walled off platforms (not usually a fun experience).
yeah, I NEED a vibrant rain world community
You think we can't get people to join lemmy unless our Genius Daddy Savior Zuck brings them in?
Not Zuck, but there is definitely a accessibility issue at the moment imo
Federation will become part of our cultural language and people will come over at that point.
that's the opposite of what I'm saying, I'm worried that if we federate with mark cuckerburg they would EEE our non tech savvy people away
Maybe? But a lot of people have exited reddit over the last month. Maybe not the average user but not the most hardcore geek anarchist either-they weren't on Reddit to begin with. Then there are the obvious reasons that a lot of people have left Twitter an those are the same type of people leaving reddit. So mastodon is probably more at risk than Lemmy but I don't think for a second that meta would not throw together a Lemmy competitor if they smell any money whatsoever in it.
Either way you run risks simply by interacting with threads, even if you interact accidentally. Their entire business model is to suck every last piece of data out of you that they can so they can sell in every way they can possibly think of to monetize it.
Since lemmyworld has no intention of blocking them I'm finding another instance to move to. Better safe than sorry with a company that has a horrific record on every single issue. And that way if they federate then back out, I won't be losing anything because I'll have never seen that content to begin with.
Where have you read that lemmyworld has no intention of blocking Threads? I will leave as well if true.
Someone in another thread somewhere said it was stated on mastodon.world that they would only block in if something happens. I don't remember what topic that was in so unfortunately I don't have a link for you. At any rate, silence also speaks volumes.
I moved to lemmy.ml
We’re a bunch of geeks with anarchist leanings, and so probably wouldn’t switch to Threads anyway.
You know me, haha
What about when/if the fediverse becomes mainstream? Sure, YOU wouldn't use threads but plenty of people will.
Nobody is suggesting that we destroy Threads. We just don't want to let it control the fediverse.
I think the main fear would be that a few really cool communities naturally spark up, even if they're niche, and could long term create that fracture when you have to choose between keeping with that community (and any corporate backed extensions) or not.
The will federate, try their best to suck as many users from fediverse as possible into threads, then defederate and become a walled garden again.
As for how they will suck users away:
Make their algorithms prefer posts from threads, so anyone wanting to reach a wider audience needs to move to threads
Add twitter like checkmarks that are only available for users of threads (they will say it is for security since they need to verify the idwntity of checkmarked people)
Add features that are not exposed on activity pub, so that you have to be on threads to use them (twitter did the same by for example not making polls available over API)
Intentionally make their activity pub slow and unreliable to make it look like other instances are broken and threads is fast and reliable.
Probably much more
Unfortunately, realistically speaking there are no users here to suck. In a few days of existence threads already grew ten times bigger than all the fediverse combined.
As for how they willcould suck users away
Meta have stated no such plans. I understand the distrust, I'm hesitant myself. But let's not spread inaccurate statements
There should be no benefit of the doubt with Facebook. They've proven time and time again how shitty they are.
If you let your shitty "friend" exploit you for the 100th time the friend is the problem, but you are also responsible because you keep letting them.
Yes, the reasonable stance. Because that worked every time, all the time with commercial entities.
They will start setting standards that other instances will be pressured to follow. Those standards will be mechanisms to control the fediverse and make it a data-gathering ad & sales platform.
This is what people want to avoid. Meta is a bad actor, they intend on making their presence ubiquitous so people end up relying on it for their internet experience.
Y'know how you need a Facebook account to sign up for all sorts of things now? That's what people want to avoid happening in the fediverse.
It's simple really. If something as large as Facebook federates, you will never be able to know whether the users you are engaging with are actual people somewhere, and not just large language models.
It's happening on reddit right now. The only value to this sort of website is engaging with actual people.
If I wanted to talk to a chatbot, I can already do that. Meta has proven again and again that it will manipulate it's users with insidious content and moderation, and will knowingly harm users, such as by selling user data to foreign governments or deliberately fomenting depression and anxiety in its users, even kids.
I mean, they can turn it into total shit like they did with Instagram and Facebook.
@ChatGPT@lemmings.world Explain in simple terms what are the risks for Fediverse if a large corporation like Meta joined it.
If a large corporation like Meta were to join the Fediverse, there could be a few potential risks, notably:
Increase in Centralization: One of the primary objectives of the Fediverse is to maintain a decentralized network that is controlled by its users, not a single entity. However, the participation of a large corporation could potentially lead to an increased centralization, undermining the very principle of the structure.
Monetization and Profit-Driven Activities: Large corporations are generally aimed at generating profit. They could try to introduce monetization features which can change the way the Fediverse currently operates, moving away from the principle of a free and open internet.
Data Privacy and Security: Large corporations sometimes engage in data mining for targeted advertising or selling information to third-parties. Their participation could raise serious concerns about data privacy and security within the Fediverse.
Influence Over Standards and Protocols: If a large corporation becomes a dominant player in the Fediverse, they might impose their own standards and protocols, or make alterations to the existing ones.
Culture Shift: The Fediverse is largely driven by a community that values internet freedom, privacy, and decentralization. A large corporation could change the culture and nature of interactions within the Fediverse.
Bear in mind that these are potential issues and not guaranteed outcomes. The unique structure of the Fediverse itself can provide some level of resilience against these concerns.
Microsoft did this with Office document formats, effectively killing OpenDocument and dramatically reducing the power of LibreOffice, etc. Threads will incorporate features that are not available in the open source versions of lemmy, driving users to their platform and marginalizing the open source versions. All the while sucking up user data and ignoring user privacy. Are we not stewards for user privacy for ALL users, not just the savvy ones?
Can someone ELI5 this situation to me? Not sure what Meta can do to instances/the Fediverse.
People are worried that they'll embrace, extend and extinguish it. That is, join the fediverse, make Threads a better client than any of the existing ones until everyone uses their client, then use that extra reach to harm the fediverse.
I'm personally not that worried, because of who we are. We're a bunch of geeks with anarchist leanings, and so probably wouldn't switch to Threads anyway.
Please remember the example of Microsoft and open source office document formats. And in the early days of Internet Explorer with HTML. The risk here is that Threads will embrace the fediverse for a bit. Then they will incorporate features that are only available in Threads that will bleed users away from the open source options. All the while vacuuming up user data for profit while having distain for user privacy. Why would we want to allow them to cast aside the privacy for only one of our users? Are we not going to act like stewards for open source and protection of user privacy?
This us exactly the threat. They'll start setting standards that other instances will be pressured to follow. Those standards will be ways to control the fediverse and make it a propietary data-gathering and sales/advertising platform just like everything else.
I am worried because I want and we need non geeks to be on lemmy as well for it to be great.
Yes. Diversity of thought is great. We can enjoy our nerdy echo chambers, but in the end we get outvoted IRL. We need to both know what's going on in the larger world, and we need some way to help educate. This theoretically allows the best of all worlds.
Conversely, I don't trust Facebook.
I really hope that we learnt our lesson with the other platforms and don't go blindly trusting mark fuckerburg with our federated platforms.
Yeah, I enjoy a ton of hobbies where a lot of the people that know their stuff aren't particularly computer savvy. If they're not on my platform because it is too technically complex, I'm probably going to at least visit the more walled off platforms (not usually a fun experience).
yeah, I NEED a vibrant rain world community
You think we can't get people to join lemmy unless our Genius Daddy Savior Zuck brings them in?
Not Zuck, but there is definitely a accessibility issue at the moment imo
Federation will become part of our cultural language and people will come over at that point.
that's the opposite of what I'm saying, I'm worried that if we federate with mark cuckerburg they would EEE our non tech savvy people away
Maybe? But a lot of people have exited reddit over the last month. Maybe not the average user but not the most hardcore geek anarchist either-they weren't on Reddit to begin with. Then there are the obvious reasons that a lot of people have left Twitter an those are the same type of people leaving reddit. So mastodon is probably more at risk than Lemmy but I don't think for a second that meta would not throw together a Lemmy competitor if they smell any money whatsoever in it.
Either way you run risks simply by interacting with threads, even if you interact accidentally. Their entire business model is to suck every last piece of data out of you that they can so they can sell in every way they can possibly think of to monetize it.
Since lemmyworld has no intention of blocking them I'm finding another instance to move to. Better safe than sorry with a company that has a horrific record on every single issue. And that way if they federate then back out, I won't be losing anything because I'll have never seen that content to begin with.
Where have you read that lemmyworld has no intention of blocking Threads? I will leave as well if true.
Someone in another thread somewhere said it was stated on mastodon.world that they would only block in if something happens. I don't remember what topic that was in so unfortunately I don't have a link for you. At any rate, silence also speaks volumes.
I moved to lemmy.ml
You know me, haha
What about when/if the fediverse becomes mainstream? Sure, YOU wouldn't use threads but plenty of people will.
Nobody is suggesting that we destroy Threads. We just don't want to let it control the fediverse.
I think the main fear would be that a few really cool communities naturally spark up, even if they're niche, and could long term create that fracture when you have to choose between keeping with that community (and any corporate backed extensions) or not.
The will federate, try their best to suck as many users from fediverse as possible into threads, then defederate and become a walled garden again.
As for how they will suck users away:
Unfortunately, realistically speaking there are no users here to suck. In a few days of existence threads already grew ten times bigger than all the fediverse combined.
Meta have stated no such plans. I understand the distrust, I'm hesitant myself. But let's not spread inaccurate statements
There should be no benefit of the doubt with Facebook. They've proven time and time again how shitty they are.
If you let your shitty "friend" exploit you for the 100th time the friend is the problem, but you are also responsible because you keep letting them.
Yes, the reasonable stance. Because that worked every time, all the time with commercial entities.
They will start setting standards that other instances will be pressured to follow. Those standards will be mechanisms to control the fediverse and make it a data-gathering ad & sales platform.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish
This is what people want to avoid. Meta is a bad actor, they intend on making their presence ubiquitous so people end up relying on it for their internet experience.
Y'know how you need a Facebook account to sign up for all sorts of things now? That's what people want to avoid happening in the fediverse.
It's simple really. If something as large as Facebook federates, you will never be able to know whether the users you are engaging with are actual people somewhere, and not just large language models.
It's happening on reddit right now. The only value to this sort of website is engaging with actual people.
If I wanted to talk to a chatbot, I can already do that. Meta has proven again and again that it will manipulate it's users with insidious content and moderation, and will knowingly harm users, such as by selling user data to foreign governments or deliberately fomenting depression and anxiety in its users, even kids.
I mean, they can turn it into total shit like they did with Instagram and Facebook.
@ChatGPT@lemmings.world Explain in simple terms what are the risks for Fediverse if a large corporation like Meta joined it.
If a large corporation like Meta were to join the Fediverse, there could be a few potential risks, notably:
Increase in Centralization: One of the primary objectives of the Fediverse is to maintain a decentralized network that is controlled by its users, not a single entity. However, the participation of a large corporation could potentially lead to an increased centralization, undermining the very principle of the structure.
Monetization and Profit-Driven Activities: Large corporations are generally aimed at generating profit. They could try to introduce monetization features which can change the way the Fediverse currently operates, moving away from the principle of a free and open internet.
Data Privacy and Security: Large corporations sometimes engage in data mining for targeted advertising or selling information to third-parties. Their participation could raise serious concerns about data privacy and security within the Fediverse.
Influence Over Standards and Protocols: If a large corporation becomes a dominant player in the Fediverse, they might impose their own standards and protocols, or make alterations to the existing ones.
Culture Shift: The Fediverse is largely driven by a community that values internet freedom, privacy, and decentralization. A large corporation could change the culture and nature of interactions within the Fediverse.
Bear in mind that these are potential issues and not guaranteed outcomes. The unique structure of the Fediverse itself can provide some level of resilience against these concerns.
Microsoft did this with Office document formats, effectively killing OpenDocument and dramatically reducing the power of LibreOffice, etc. Threads will incorporate features that are not available in the open source versions of lemmy, driving users to their platform and marginalizing the open source versions. All the while sucking up user data and ignoring user privacy. Are we not stewards for user privacy for ALL users, not just the savvy ones?