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”.

  • danc4498@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    11 months ago

    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.

    • Dieinahole@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      11 months ago

      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

      • helenslunch@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        11 months ago

        And then when they own the servers amd all the traffic

        That’s just…not how any of this works.

    • PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      11 months ago

      All activity pub needed to do was create a user rights guidelines that prevents profiting off the data. Meta wouldn’t have touched the Fediverse with the 10-foot pole, if that were the case.

          • ttmrichter@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            ActivityPub can’t license anything. When you identify actual human beings in this conversation, perhaps you might have a point. So far you don’t.

            • PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              First off, calm the hell down. You’re being needlessly antagonistic.

              Secondly, it seems like the W3C is the publisher of the activity pub standard seems like they ducats what is an isnt compliant.

              Seems like of was specifically authored by a team including Evan Prodromou according to the wiki.

              If they wanted too, but like literally and open source software, it could have been given licencing requirements

              Specifically, my research has turned up that implementations of these protocols can be licensed. Threads’ version of ActivityPub likely has its own licence. I think it would be safe to say that the creators of Lemmy and Mastodon specifically could have privacy rights dictated within their license implementation. That would nullify threads legal capabilities.

              • ttmrichter@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                11 months ago

                You don’t “implement” a license. For fuck’s sake could you at least learn the terminology of a domain before spouting opinions on it?!

    • DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      People have been writing about this ad nauseum. It’s the embrace, extend, extinguish strategy. Join fediverse, extend the spec with so that not all clients are compatible with all features, repeat as necessary until everyone is using your client, finally drop compatibility with other clients.