Actually that's just from 51% of the fediverse, like the article showed.
Other still are open to this topic and give Meta's threads the same chance like any instance would get.
What we all agree on is that meta needs to play nice if they want to be part of the fedivers. But it appears to me some are so disappointed from meta (or maybe preoccupied) that they will never give meta a chance.
51% of the fediverse, like the article showed.
That's a single instance, not the entire fediverse. I know reading is hard sometimes.
But it appears to me some are so disappointed from meta (or maybe preoccupied) that they will never give meta a chance.
Where have you been the past 15 years?? Meta was given a chance, over and over and over again. They've shown and continue to show that they do not care about the communities on their platforms, they don't care about privacy, they don't care how their algorithms push alt-right garbage, they even encourage it as some studies have shown. That's not even getting into half the shit they've done to ruin communities and the internet at large.
Anybody that wants to "give Meta a chance" on the Fediverse has to be a corporate shill or just real, real dense.
That’s a single instance, not the entire fediverse. I know reading is hard sometimes.
Which means it can't be taken to represent the fediverse, which I think is what @Feyter was trying to get across.
The issue is that they're trying to get into the federverse, and draw it's users away. Larger silicon valley companies like this are notorious for buddying up to smaller companies and opportunities like Lemmy, kbin, and Mastodon and then slowly squeezing them out. They want our content and our users, and they'll kill the fediverse in the process.
Just watch. It'll start small with requested updates, how we handle content moderation, small requirements, the "we changed for you, you need to change a little for us" approach. And they'll start asking for other "small" updates here and there that start benefitting Threads more and more, and start choking off the fediverse until we become reliant on them.
I've explained elsewhere why I don't think that's an actual issue for the fediverse, but my comment wasn't about Meta. It was just pointing out that the top comment in this chain from @Dee is not accurate because the fediverse doesn't have a single, cohesive view of Meta joining the fediverse.
Have you seen how meta does business?! Talk about a straight up evil corporation.
They don't know how to play nice. They have no interest in playing nice. They're out to make as much money, whatever it takes. They either buy their competitors or try to kill them. The fediverse is not for sale and we need to keep a healthy distance so they don't get a chance to kill us.
Do not federate with meta.
The article says that stat about one instance not the entire fediverse...
I'll never give Meta a chance. I don't want anything to do with them.
What, you're just going to judge them based on their decades of previous behaviour?!
It's absurd that this got so many downvotes. Some people are just too naive for their own good
Actually that's just from 51% of the fediverse, like the article showed.
Other still are open to this topic and give Meta's threads the same chance like any instance would get.
What we all agree on is that meta needs to play nice if they want to be part of the fedivers. But it appears to me some are so disappointed from meta (or maybe preoccupied) that they will never give meta a chance.
That's a single instance, not the entire fediverse. I know reading is hard sometimes.
Where have you been the past 15 years?? Meta was given a chance, over and over and over again. They've shown and continue to show that they do not care about the communities on their platforms, they don't care about privacy, they don't care how their algorithms push alt-right garbage, they even encourage it as some studies have shown. That's not even getting into half the shit they've done to ruin communities and the internet at large.
Anybody that wants to "give Meta a chance" on the Fediverse has to be a corporate shill or just real, real dense.
Which means it can't be taken to represent the fediverse, which I think is what @Feyter was trying to get across.
The issue is that they're trying to get into the federverse, and draw it's users away. Larger silicon valley companies like this are notorious for buddying up to smaller companies and opportunities like Lemmy, kbin, and Mastodon and then slowly squeezing them out. They want our content and our users, and they'll kill the fediverse in the process.
Just watch. It'll start small with requested updates, how we handle content moderation, small requirements, the "we changed for you, you need to change a little for us" approach. And they'll start asking for other "small" updates here and there that start benefitting Threads more and more, and start choking off the fediverse until we become reliant on them.
I've explained elsewhere why I don't think that's an actual issue for the fediverse, but my comment wasn't about Meta. It was just pointing out that the top comment in this chain from @Dee is not accurate because the fediverse doesn't have a single, cohesive view of Meta joining the fediverse.
Have you seen how meta does business?! Talk about a straight up evil corporation.
They don't know how to play nice. They have no interest in playing nice. They're out to make as much money, whatever it takes. They either buy their competitors or try to kill them. The fediverse is not for sale and we need to keep a healthy distance so they don't get a chance to kill us.
Do not federate with meta.
The article says that stat about one instance not the entire fediverse...
I'll never give Meta a chance. I don't want anything to do with them.
What, you're just going to judge them based on their decades of previous behaviour?!
It's absurd that this got so many downvotes. Some people are just too naive for their own good