Dear server admins, please defederate threads.net. Dear users, ask your server admin to defederate threads.net.
mstdn.social
Meta just announced that they are trying to integrate Threads with ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, etc.). We need to defederate them if we want to avoid them pushing their crap into fediverse.
If you're a server admin, please defederate Meta's domain "threads.net"
If you don't run your own server, please ask your server admin to defederate "threads.net".
Yeah dude let’s just federate with an instance maintained by a corporation that has undoubtedly caused a genocide in Myanmar by turning a blind eye to a far-right hate speech group that caused an entire fucking minority to flee into another country.
I don’t get why people are supporting and saying “oh it must be up to the user” like bro this is the company we’re dealing with. Fuck that fuck threads fuck zuckerberg i don’t want his shit cancer near something that’s going well so far.
Israel have been successfully pressuring meta to remove and shadow ban accounts sympathetic to Palestinians. The level of censorship is crazy.
OK, I'll bite. You got something more substantial than "I read it on the internet" to back that up? One reputable source on your accusation? Not sayin' you're lying/wrong, just asking for some verifiable proof.
Numerous actual popular accounts and news sources have been suspended. It was major news in the Arabic-speaking world in October. Meta even apologized for auto-translating Palestinian as “terrorist.”
At the moment this is coming from secondary sources from within meta so there are no articles about it that I'm aware of. But Palestinians and activists constantly have their content removed, account reach limited, and comments removed (which has happened to me multiple times). People also have their accounts threatened and removed.
These actions are visible constantly, meta have been doing this since the start. For example, when you go to someone's stories at the top it might show 4 or 5 stories, but when you click through to their profile there'll be 20+.
Some people I follow don't even show up at the top anymore and I have to access their stories via their profile page or if I've messaged them recently.
If they want to hang out with us, they can make an account somewhere other than thread, bam, done!
lemm.ee already made the decision, based off of the voice of the community to defederate from Threads
Lemmy.Ca admins blocked Threads about 5 months ago: https://lemmy.ca/comment/901551
You can confirm that Threads dot net is still blocked by Lemmy.Ca by going to https://lemmy.ca/instances and clicking on the "Blocked Instances" tab.
Thanks, I actually forgot that one can check!
lemmy.dbzer0.com also blocked Threads
please take a look at the replies under zuck's own post in threads.net and determine if that's the type of content you want.
for those who don't want to visit, majority of the commentators are bots. some advertising crypto, and others asking for money.
even if you think you can individually block those accounts, keep in mind the size of threads compared to fediverse.
for Lemmy: monthly active users are barely
150K40K, while for threads it's 100 million. there's no chance you can control that inflow of bots.and if it still doesn't convince you, you can read threads' privacy policy, which states that they'll gather all that pii if you interact with their content.
most of the internet is already bigtech, I don't want Lemmy to become another arm of it. though I have faith in my instance maintainer and dessalines, the dev.
Even if there were no bots and it was only "real" content from Threads ... is that the sort of content we want to have Lemmy flooded with?
Your public account info, public posts, and interactions are not "PII", they're what's necessary for every instance in the fediverse to work. How do you think people are going to see your name and your posts if their servers can't access it? There's literally nothing stopping Meta from hoovering up all that data right now anyway, because it's PUBLIC.
sorry, I didn't follow the legal definition of what's PII in the comment.
with meta, just the IP address and one visit is enough to personally identify you though. they have testified before that they have profiles on users who haven't signed up with any of their (dis)services at all.
and threads explicitly states in their privacy policy that they use pixels and web beacons, which they use for this purpose.
Looks like the exact same bullshit as facebook and twitter. There might be better examples of good or bad posting though since Zuckerzuck's posts are especially spammed out, since splammy people think they're especially good for visibility.
Comment stolen from user "copygirl" from blahaj.zone:
It's not as if something was preventing them from
and
here anyway.
So that part about being followed by a Threads user is just a bit stupid.
The danger is in them becoming an integral part of the network where people don't bother to register at a normal instance, and then Meta pulling out and the network remaining half-dead.
Anyone can collect the data anyway, and I'm sure at least one person out there is already harvesting our Fediverse data.
There's a big difference between some random person and Meta collecting the data.
Who says that Meta is not already harvesting our data? Lemmy really is about moving control out of corporate hands and decentralisation advantages, but profiling is insanely easy on the Fediverse, and it really cannot be different because of its inherent interconnectedness. It makes no sense to migrate from conventional social media to Fediverse equivalents if all one cares about is privacy.
How do you know that meta hasn't created an account on a popular well federated server and it's using those credentials to scrape the fetiverse?
You have to assume whatever your post to the Internet is available to anyone and everyone connected. Why would federated servers be and different.
Is there any sort of legal precedent that covers a situation where:
When I joint my instance, am I implicitly agreeing to any terms of service that exist on any instance that my instance decides to federate with?#
Someone actually asked an almost identical question on StackEx a while ago. (things may have changed since) From what I got from skimming the answer, is there is precedence, and it should be covered within the TOS of the hosting website/network (i.e. lemmy.world)
https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/7773/does-a-tos-also-apply-for-third-party-resources-on-a-website
Lemmy and mastodon profiles are public so I don’t know if privacy concerns are a problem unique to federation with meta considering they could just scrape your profile if they wanted the data that bad. I’d be much more concerned about small instance admins losing funding as users migrate to instances that federate with meta until threads and the big instances are the only ones left on the fediverse
Let users decide because we’re fucking adults.
Great thing about the fediverse
People get to decide what they want from their platform
Surely you're aware of the embrace, extend, extinguish corporate strategy.
People only get to decide what they want from their platform until facebook starts extending the spec. Then your client will become incompatible with some posts, and so on and so forth.
In summary, it's a threat to the platform itself.
Yeah dude let’s just federate with an instance maintained by a corporation that has undoubtedly caused a genocide in Myanmar by turning a blind eye to a far-right hate speech group that caused an entire fucking minority to flee into another country.
I don’t get why people are supporting and saying “oh it must be up to the user” like bro this is the company we’re dealing with. Fuck that fuck threads fuck zuckerberg i don’t want his shit cancer near something that’s going well so far.
Then go join threads.net? Nobody's stopping you from doing that. That would put you on a server friendly to your beliefs.
Server admins also have opinions, and are not required to take a democratic vote and each individual user's choice into account. They can decide for themselves, and they will, for good or ill. If you don't like where it ends up, your user decision should be to fuck off to threads.
I don't think that's what they're saying.
They're saying that some users and admins might choose to wait and see
"Yes, Jeffrey has, in the past, killed and eaten gay men. But we should wait and see. It's impolite not to invite him to the party!"
This is a bigger issue to leave it to users imo. Like lemm.ee admin said a few months ago, threads is too fucking big.
Anything they push on the fediverse will be what users see in All. Plus, popular stuff on threads is determined through Facebook's algorithm, and it will also determine the fediverse recommendations by consequence.
The above is solvable if you block them I guess, but by default it will completely ruin everything.
However, lemmy 0.19 block feature doesn't work on users of an instance, only posts hosted in an instance. Add to this that Facebook is a cancerous company making all its money from ads. Expect their bots to comment and make posts pushing ads on all instances.
All of this will also mean high workload on mods to regulate the content. Threads doesn't bring anything good here, and defederation is probably the only way to protect us.
You have the full right to decide, you can switch servers to one that chooses to, or open multiple accounts. That's your choice. This isn't Nostr, in the Fediverse instance blocking is normal and it happens without your input, but you know what does happen with your input? Registering your account on a server that fits your needs best, or as close as possible.
In favor of defederation. If I start seeing garbage from threads in my feed, I'm switching instances. I don't want Meta pushing their divisive, hateful, misinformation all up in my feeds. Meta will kill fedi. We don't need them.
Yeah. I'll switch to an instance that is defederated from Threads, if mine doesn't.
I left Meta's other properties to avoid state sponsored hate speech. I won't use a platform that gives hate speech a platform.
I don't need to wait to know if Meta will do that. I already know.
I'm onboard with this as well. I can't imagine this instance would federeate with Threads, and I respect the admins here a lot, but I'd lose that respect and trust immediately if we aren't smart enough to defederate from Threads. We've seen what happens when these tech giants get their claws in anything.
Serious question though - how would you? Meta can't push content in your feed. The only reason you're going to see Meta in your feed is if the community here (or people you follow on mastodon) decide they want to show it.
If anybody remembers XMPP being widespread and what Facebook, Google, Apple and others (say, I personally remember VK and Yandex in Russia supporting it) did to it, that's what will happen if you "wait and see".
EDIT: oh, half the thread is such comments
I remember what the standardising committee did to XMPP: users wanted to share photos, send files, and make audio/video calls; XMPP said "we're not going to standardize that, but each application can use its own extensions"... then it all went to hell.
XMPP is still alive and well, is it not?
You don't get how big it was in 2007. I used ICQ and felt some sort of peer pressure (and progress pressure) to switch to XMPP. You could chat in FB via XMPP, in VK via XMPP, a lot of services would just give you an XMPP account because why not. It was like RSS.
Will the Mastodon and Lemmy instances we have today cease to exist because of Threads federating?
I'm just genuinely curious how we could be worse off than before.
From a previous comment of mine:
To be clear, I want it to be users deciding on Lemmy too. Also, people already here moving to threads wouldn't be the problem, we're small in comparison to them. It would be a few things:
How to kill a decentralized network (such as the fediverse)
Currently, I think there are two main branches of ActivityPub implementations: Microblogs(Mastodon and its forks, the microblog portion of kbin), which are user centric, and group based aggregators(Lemmy, Kbin, peertube, future Pixelfed), both of which are valid implementations, however, they don't really work well with each other.
So, I believe that the threat of Threads to Lemmy instances is really overblown for the simple reason that there is no way for a Lemmy user to browse microblog contents through federation to begin with, whether it be Mastodon or Threads.
Kbin actually does let you look at and browse microblogs as well as threads.
You mention kbin/mbin, but you do not understand its power!
If anything meta integrates here I'm out.
If this kill the fediverse I might just dip from all social media. Had enough.
Same, I'm right on the edge of giving up on it too. Anything meta and Twitter touch just turns to shit.
I donate a nice chunk of cash to lemmyworld servers and devs. Meta is going to reduce the quality of Lemmy. It is going to get overrun with bots and advertisments and genuine conversations are going to dissapear. I and probably many other donators will not want to stick around if we get overrun with bot posts and advertisements like reddit.
Same. Facebook and anything related to it is blocked on my DNS so if threads happens then I would rather go back to reddit than stay here.. Fuck this shit.
Let's not defederate from every corporate player. Some of them can probably respect reasonable rules of civility.
But fuck Meta. We already know how this plays out.
We know there's a huge wave of hatred and misinformation incoming. We've seen it on their other platforms.
When Tumblr came out about the idea of opening up and using activity pub people were in favor of that idea. It's not just hating companies, Facebook really has a bad track record when it comes to abusive practices and also extremely poor content moderation (you can find right wing hate speech on Facebook despite them having policies against it, people report it and nothing happens).
There was an interesting paired poll done, asking about federation with Threads and federation with Tumblr.
66% of people were wary of or actively opposed federating with Threads. Fewer than 20% were wary of or actively opposed federating with Tumblr.
It's not "defederate from every corporate player". It's passing this message on to Meta:
Okay. I’ve seen stuff like this on both mastodon, and here, but i haven’t heard about them doing anything that would actually harm the fediverse. I guess i don’t know what the problem is. I know they’ve got a negative reputation, and for good reason, but isn’t that the awesome part of threads being federated? We can follow and connect to people there without being part of their system, and therefor not susceptible to their bs? If I’m missing something please fill me in.
It is inevitable that Meta will try to kill the fediverse while chasing profits, there is no other possibility in their endgame.
If that is pushing ads into other instances or killing those instances entirely we don’t know yet but it will happen.
It has to because the shareholders must always have more.
I just don’t think it’s possible for something to kill the fediverse. And if it is possible, then it is a flaw in the design of the fediverse and needs to be fixed.
Are you planning to pay for the extra bandwith to deal with all the additional traffic?
Meta will.
And then when they own the servers amd all the traffic, lemmy will be quietly murdered.
Quietly, because they'll control the traffic, and therefore the narrative
Give https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html a read. Might sway you, might not.
This is an excellent point. Thanks!
in that case considering meta is saying that it would take nearly a year to federate the platform we probably should defederate them.
Just think:
Meta has literal billions of users.
The entire fediverse has about 1.5 million.
Less than a fraction of a percent.
Why in THE FUCK would meta notice, or care, at fucking all? The entire fediverse of traffic ported over to meta wouldn't budge their advertising bottom line.
But, it's a comparatively small group of smart people, having conversations, and profiles they don't have tabs and near total control over.
There's news about cop city and gaza I have seen here that I've seen NOWHERE else.
Don't let them control the narrative here
Well, then, let’s make our point I’ll just email the holders of the instances I’m on and let them know I support defederating threads
Meta will be okay making money off lemmy indirectly for a while. Then, if they grow, they'll want more than a toehold.
When it's Facebook, trust that greed and power are the goals.
People are concerned because there were examples of such things going horribly wrong, most notably with Google and XMPP.
Way back in the day, Google announced that its Talk messenger will support XMPP, which made decentralization fans very happy - finally, they can communicate with everyone from the comfort of their decentralized instance!..oh.
Google started implementing features in Talk that are incompatible with XMPP, and then dropped XMPP support altogether, ending up deprecating Talk in favor of Google-only Hangouts. This forced many XMPP users to get into Google's ecosystem, since the people they contacted through XMPP were mostly just using Google Talk, and they couldn't be contacted through XMPP any more. As a result, XMPP became worse off than it started and got practically forgotten by all but 1,5 nerds who keep it alive.
now most of their contacts were in defederated Google to which they now didn't have access.
this ☝️. Those of us who remember what happened then, understand the potential dangers of federating with a juggernaut like META.
We should tread lightly!
Is it even true? I doubt XMPP was ever popular outside of google's talk.
Xmpp's popularity isn't the point.
The point is google intentionally killed it
@Creatortray
You've just written it : their negative reputation for easaly understandable reasons. We can already foresee Threads will very soon be used to spread the most toxic campaigns on the net and that will undoubtably harm the Fediverse. One of the most valuable trait of the Fediverse is its decentralization and consequently, the potential accountability of any server administrator. Why should we take those risks when it's so easy to avoid it? #BlockThreadsOut
@mypasswordis1234
We should avoid making blanket demands like this to the fediverse as a whole. I happen to support your position, but we should take into account the diverse nature of the social web.
Instead of making demands, explain your reasoning and leave each community to make up their own mind. This is the beautiful nature of the social web; we have broken decision making down into many smaller units instead of one mega instance/corporation.
Find a community that resonates with your own thinking on this issue, and over time a thousand different servers will gather experiences and a picture will start to form; was federation with Meta a good or a bad thing?
There's a list of people that have agreed to block it at https://fedipact.online/
That site is an assault on my eyes.
Graphic design is my passion.
Web 1.0 always was a good lookin kid
0.19 allows users themselves to block instances...
How about users make decisions for themselves and block Threads if they want?
What exactly is "pushing their crap"? Chances are it will be more moderated and less arbitrary than what passes through from some lemmy instances. Hatred and misinformation? Harvesting your data? Like this isn't already a factor with lemmy? In the Fediverse, we have admins who flagrantly break their own TOS. Plus it seems to me this is an opportunity for lemmy to get advertisement at Threads' expense.
I do see it as a potential problem with moderation on Lemmy's end. You have all of the users from Threads interacting with Lemmy and Kbin users. It's possible there's an influx of accounts on here that are trolling, and it becomes unmanageable to moderate everything on Lemmy's side.
But Threads will have no problems with content moderation.
I really, really doubt that this is going to be a concern. First, while technically Mastodon can interact with Lemmy, in practice how often does it happen? It's not zero, but it's not a lot, either, and I doubt that Threads will change that much because while it's a neat technical feature, link aggregators and micro-blogging platforms are pretty incompatible culturally.
And then we have to remember that we're talking about Threads normies. Do we really think that a bunch of Swifties and Kardasholes and other influencers are going to look at the absolute zoo of Marxist/Anarchist/Linuxist users on Lemmy and be like "this is the type of content I've been waiting for, I need to interact more with that community"? This reminds me a lot of neckbeards saying they wouldn't date Megan Fox because she has weird thumbs.
And then we have the whole thing with the actual fediverse and the tech behind it. There is still going to be no algorithm artificially inflating the popularity of what are thinly veiled ads. Meta has no mechanism for introducing ads into the Fedi. Lemmy is not suddenly going to be massively interested in the vast majority of content on threads and start upvoting to the moon.
And the dev team behind the fedi I would wager is going to prevent any sort of real technical takeover, so that means that at any point defederating is possible, and with basically no loss to the fedi.
Aside from the "moral" argument, can someone ELI5 what harm can a federated threads.net do on other users (like me) and/or instances?
the general strategie is called "embrace, extend, extinguish". This strat is the reason, why everyone uses MS Office today
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish
that reminds me of Apple with iMessage
It's not necessarily about a threat to instances or users. It's more an issue with how Meta could potentially hijack the protocol the whole thing is built on, and do damage in the long run. There's a write up here on how similar things have happened in the past;
https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html
This is what it's about, right here. I wish more people would understand this. This is not some loose anti-coporate sentiment or senseless alarm sounding. We have example after example of how corporations like Meta, Microsoft, and Google leverage their power to consume and destroy. To say "we just need to be proactive about stopping them" is naive. We've said that so many times, and every time we've lost.
The only way to win is not to play their game. We can't let them in in the first place.
Edit: a word
You should look into Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. I think the biggest fear is that they have so many users that they will just flood all instances with their stuff. This can, in time, lead to a situation where they can defederate from everything else and bring a lot of people with them, since most of the content will have come from Threads.
They can absorb large numbers of users and communities and after a while close themselves to the outside. Meaning that once people "need" those communities they'll have no chance other than go threads.
If you don't subscribe to threads you'll never see it.
will i see (negative) culture change
Undoubtedly.
Great and such, but the large majority that might come to the Fediverse will never look nor use that function. If we don't defederate with our instances now, we never will.
*everyone doesn't
Defederation is cancer and it will kill Fediverse faster than any Meta.
Millions of Facebook users outnumbering previous users 100 to 1 will kill it. Oh, there'll be more activity than ever, but it will be a sanitised corporate safe space for advertisers, where millions of normies argue about politics, with misinformation and ads sprinkled throughout.
Okay, and as inevitable as that seems, how about instances wait until that happens, and THEN defederate? The preemptive defederation is disappointing to see. My home instance has done it. I'll have to wait and see who DOESN'T defederate so I can make an alt account and see for myself what happens.
Meta is a known bad actor right up to the point of knowing they were facilitating a genocide and choosing not to do anything about it because "growth".
"Yes, he's murdered people before in cold blood, but maybe he won't this time. There's no excuse for banning John Wayne Gacy from the party!"
wouldn't Facebook/Threads users be the ones getting the ads?
Not all ads are marked as ads
Ability to choose with whom to federate with is a core concept of the Fediverse
If you don't want any defederation, join an instance that doesn't do it.
I can kinda see the point, but also without providing actual reasons, this post just seems like a LARP.
I got a reason! It's because people are afraid meta is doing what Microsoft did to a much earlier project. The crux of that whole story is that Microsoft adopted the new tech, became the biggest player thus dominating the area, then, when they had full control of the tech they ended up shutting it down. Some people are convinced meta is going to do that to the fediverse.
This is vague and handwavy, I'm hoping someone actually knows the name of the project. It was early 90s I believe or maybe into the early 00s but it was before my time in the tech sphere of the internet.
I don't understand how they would control it
They have their branding which will push people to use their platform. More people using their platform = more content coming from threads. Once they have enough posts from threads that people from other instances are used to seeing mostly threads content they'll defederate. People will miss the volume of posts and then move to threads.
Corporate servers with corp funding and corp advertising using existing instagram and facebook support to onboard more users and generate content to the point where they drown out non-thread content to a point where, theoretically, non-thread servers become silent for content and more read-only.
Then, they pull the plug, and the fledgeling communities we had here have withered and have to restart all over again.
Who knows if thats the actual goal, but thats the idea.
just by being the biggest player in the system so all the activity is on their server, then they shut it down and leave the rest of the drivers with a big hole in the community.
You might not understand how they are going to control it, but they do. Facebook doesn't do anything without a plan on how to either get a ton of money from something or a plan on how to destroy that thing. So the fact that they are trying to integrate into the fediverse means they have a plan. They are smarter and more evil than anyone here in the area of making money and destroying competitors, and they will 100% do one of those things, probably both.
Oddly, this may well be what really spurs on decentralisation. I suspect more and more individuals, or small groups, will spin up their own instances rather than all gravitating to the bigger ones, due to issues like this.
Because, ultimately, the more tech-savvy users (the ones more likely to be into the Fediverse, anyway) will want to decide for themselves what content they do and don't see.
And it's nothing to do with whether or note someone likes/trusts Meta. It's people being able to make their own decisions on what content they want to be able to follow and not have it decided by someone else based on their interests. If someone's friends/family/fandom has a heavy Threads presence, they can spin up their own instance and be able to follow that content themselves without it really affecting anyone else. (and without having to sign up to Threads themselves...)
Well, I said before I'll leave any servers that federate with Meta, and it's looking like that time.
I hate Zuck and Facebook as much as the next person, but I think the rollout is going slowly enough that we don’t need to fight about it yet.
The discussion is important and needs to be had, but it’s premature.
Everywhere this pops up, the users have decided:
Fuck meta. Fuck threads. Fuck the zuck.
Do not associate. Defederate now
The best case scenario of letting Meta in is neutrality. Far more likely is then actively destroying stuff. Remember, their motto is move fast and break things
Is threads.net going to hit the top of "most defederated" list? People hate it even more than gab and truthsocial.
Too bad people on mastodon don't have the ability to block an instance they find objectionable for themselves-- oh wait.
Not sure about Lemmy, but we can do this on mastodon. I don't need someone else deciding for me.
Tldr? Couldn't disagree more
I agree, I don't want a blanket ban on Threads. I know Meta is a horrible company, but we shouldn't decide in advance.
Honestly, I'd be very happy to be able to follow people on Threads through my privacy-respecting Mastodon/Lemmy app. Because, let's be serious: we're just a bunch of nerds here. If I want to follow famous people or companies, I'm going to find them on Meta's platforms, not here.
ActivityPub lets me follow those accounts without using Meta's apps, which are famously riddled with ads, trackers and whatnot.
lemmy very recently got this feature.
@mypasswordis1234 I mean, what is the point in defederating while being in a Lemmy instance? You cannot interact with microblog while using #Lemmy. The only thing that comes to my mind is that threads users will not be able to comment on a lemmy post or comment, but let's be honest, the way communities will probably federate to #threads (the same way it is today with mastodon*) is not good, thus reducing the amount of attraction a lemmy post can get over there.
ActivityPub allows two post formats, Notes and Articles. Articles support titles and therefore posts on Lemmy and threads on /kbin use them, while notes do not and are therefore used for microblogging and commenting. Currently Mastodon's article federation only goes so far as linking the post for content, and to be honest I'm doubtful whether Threads will federate Articles at all given their carefulness with federation.
I'm not too worried about Threads joining the metaverse. What Mark Zuckerberg has failed to realise is just how barebones his Twitter clone is.
Mastodon has support for trending topics and hashtags. Threads doesn't. Lacking such an absolutely basic feature that any microblogging platform would otherwise support is why Threads dropped from 500M active users to just a fraction of it.
I joined it near launch, made a few posts and then stopped. There is nothing worthwhile on Threads and I don't think leeching on to the fediverse.
Also, I can kinda understand why you all rushed to defederate from Gab when they tried to jump on the federation bandwagon, but not Meta.
Zuckerberg doesn't need us to overtake X. He needs to actually make a functional social media app first, then put more resources into moderating it.
X is still on top despite Elon Musk's stewardship because his competitors are either too small (most federated instances), require too big of a technical hurdle for the average Joe to use (the fediverse in general), or are downright incompetent (Threads.)
This take is riddled with naivety.
Not only will Meta read, train AI on, aggregate and datamine, and correlate this data with your real identity, but when Meta announces that “the easiest way to be on the fediverse is to just use Threads” then all the people who avoided Mastodon because it was “too complicated” to sign up, all the people who are basically already signed up because they scroll Insta all day, will go with Threads instead of spreading the load out.
As smaller instances start to drop off under the load, under the lack of interest as threads grows and they shrink, merely mirroring the traffic of a centralized corporate entity, users start to flock to threads for its reliability and speed.
Then Meta pulls the plug, since “no one really used this ActivityPub thing anyway, it was too technical”.
Threads isn’t about beating “X” (lol X is in a death spiral, it’s only a matter of time), it’s about ensuring the Fediverse never rises up.
See what happened with Google Talk and XMPP.
That's the face you make when the hamster in your ass sneezes.
That is beyond offensive. As a butthole hamster shover upper, I refuse to be brought down to Zuck's level, there aint no way possible we ( hamster asshole stuffers) should be dragged through the mud and besmirch our good name. Let the robot lizard people keep him. Harumph...
Could threads generate so much data that it costs to much to keep an instance/server running?
In my opinion all big player are just federating to destroy the fediverse or take it over. Why else would they be here? There is just no need for them to be here exept to kill competition before it gets to big.
Honest discourse for the purpose of highlighting any possible issues and fortifying against the EEE process. (Prepare for war; hope for peace):
Let's say they were able to join... (We should at the very least go over this possibility, as it can also help our admins decide.) How would we be able to protect our network?
Would making sure any features of one instance/app be open and able to be modified and/or gracefully integrated into another be an option? (similar to the GPL license) An example would be keeping a party from restricting access to a private network only through their app. (looking at you, gTalk and iMessage)
Any other suggestions?
lemmy.world and by extension mastodon.world is probably still waiting to see what happens. The other instance I have my account on has a rather hands-off approach to moderation soooo I hope there's some way for a user to block an instance on their own.
NextThis version of LemmyIt actually just released yesterday!
"Everyone everywhere should federate."
"Not like that!"
Better yet, let them enjoy the full connectivity for a month. Once they've enjoyed all the awesome content and got used to it - defederate.
By all means, fuck Meta to the moon and back, but for goodness' sake, users on federated servers can choose to block the domain with the same result, not to mention that admins can simply restrict it (see social.coop/@eloquence/1115888…). It just isn't so black and white as people are making it seem.
Federation with a bigger platform is realistically the only way for Fedi to become mainstream, and at the moment Meta seems at least to be trying to be communicative. And with their quite unvaluable userbase they really don't have enough leverage against the privacy-concious Fediverse to turn AP into MetaPub. For now.
You're playing the classic "it's the individual responsability" game. It's how you deregulate everything and the consumer losses every right.
We have to acknowledge that we have systemic or/and societal issues. This is a systemic issues so a common thing.
But I don't want the fediverse to become mainstream!!
I know, I know, most people think it's the best thing.
But I selfishly prefer the fediverse to be as it is now. Actually, as it was a couple of months ago. Lemmy is already being filled with rage-baiting bullshit, which is one of the reasons I decided to leave reddit.
I am 100% with you. Becoming mainstream is what ruins most good communities that end up ruined. Hell, even Facebook was a 1000x better before they opened it to non-college users.
Why? This sounds like FUD.
I’m against the defederation. The internet and the www are based on the idea of connection.
That is naive look on it. Meta(Facebook) is a company, it's always company interest and only company interest. The idea of fediverse is to stay out of data tracking, user profiling, not to help it in any way. Connecting with meta is workoing aginst fediverse. It might be a mistake fediverse never recovers from, even now it's really small fedi community.
Why would we as fedi users, mods and admins help meta or any other company, for what, for their interest that they sell on "we love fediverse", "cusotmer first" bla bla bla.
Following your logic we must federate with every CP and right-wing instance. Abusive parents would love your logic. "But we're your parents you're supposed to love us!"
@tedvdb@feddit.nl Hey :)
I highly recommend using Boost for Lemmy for mobile use. One simple reason at the moment (there are many): it has a tagging feature that allows you to display text next to a user's handle. ITT there are 4-5 users I've tagged as centrist or right wing trolls and they are all the fuck over the thread, arguing in favor of Facebook being a part of the fediverse. This does not surprise me in the least, but at least the tagging helps me immediately identify the shitbirds making bad faith arguments so I can easily ignore their garbage opinions.
I'd personally at least give them a chance. Defederating is a pretty easy process and can be performed at any point in time. At least some Threads users may as well get to know about Lemmy and switch to it.
Upd: yes I do understand many people don't trust Meta and neither do I. But I also understand lots and lots of users here are using anonymous accounts, and federation information is already public to begin with. Combining the fact that Fediverse may gain more than it may lose, including more users, original content, recognition and etc, I generally think it's worth the risk. I am generally content with any decision, just sharing my two pennies of thought.
Meta has had plenty of chances in the past as a massive leader in the social media market. Those chances have been used to conduct illegal violations of user privacy, monopolize multiple market sectors, and ultimately go as far as actively abetting crimes against humanity. It is entirely reasonable and I think fundamentally imperative not to give them any more chances.