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”.

  • aldalire@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    312
    ·
    9 months ago

    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.

    • guriinii@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      95
      ·
      9 months ago

      Israel have been successfully pressuring meta to remove and shadow ban accounts sympathetic to Palestinians. The level of censorship is crazy.

      • raoulraoul@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        74
        ·
        9 months ago

        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.

        • SulaymanF@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          54
          ·
          9 months ago

          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.”

        • guriinii@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          9 months ago

          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.

          • raoulraoul@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            9 months ago

            After (as of this reply) eight hours, you have produced nothing more than anecdotal evidence if not outright invented. I must assume at this point you are spreading disinformation for whatever your goals may be to that end.

            Thank you for wasting everybody’s time.

            • money_loo@1337lemmy.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              9 months ago

              Welcome to Lemmy!

              It’s like Reddit with the provocative takes and hyperbole, but even more extreme somehow!

              This place is hilarious.

        • JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Well a good friend of my girlfriend is from Gaza. He has been posting translations from his sister’s account of what it is actually like living there right now. Then some AI artwork behind stories of “this place was bombed, my friends just were killed, etc…” and he got a big notification on Instagram that “his account has been restricted for violent hate speech” even though he didn’t incite violence even one time. He just has posts with 2nd person stories of the situation there.

      • helenslunch@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        And thus is the problem with charging tech oligopolies with being the arbiters of truth: sometimes they disagree with you, but whatever they believe is “the truth”, because they make it so.

      • woelkchen@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        If they want to hang out with us, they can make an account somewhere other than thread, bam, done!

        “make another account somewhere” isn’t really what federation is about.

        • Draconic NEO@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          9 months ago

          Indeed it is, they’re not saying you have to make an account on that person’s server, they’re saying that you can make it on a different server, that’s the point of federation you can join other servers that are connected to them. It’s not to be fully open without any limitations, because if it were then content moderation would be impossible.

          Services like Nostr have this problem, they are like the wild West where anything goes and you can’t do anything about it. To some people that seems great but the fact of the matter is those services are filled with right-wing trolls and crypto scammers (likely plenty of other nasty stuff as well) because they cannot be moderated.

          • woelkchen@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Mastodon, Kbin, the new Lemmy 0.19 release allow on a per user basis to block entire domains, so I don’t see how this is a “you can’t do anything about it” situation. Just let users decide.

            • Draconic NEO@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              9 months ago

              Lemmy 0.19’s instance blocking does not filter users, only communities, in addition it does not solve the problems of content polution because it does not limit interaction from blocked malicious users in any way, just hides them (it only really works under the assumption that they’re not malicious users and the blocker is just throwing a fit). For these reasons it is not and cannot be seen as an a replacement to defederation.

              Also as I already said users are 100% free to decide, they decide by choosing their instances. If you don’t like it you’re free to host your own or move to a more open protocol like Nostr. The idea of federation was built around the idea of communicating with certain instances and blocking others, not about users individually choosing the servers they connect with, Some servers do operate democratically but in the end the fediverse is designed around servers so servers have every right to choose.

              Also I’d like to address the “defederation will kill the fediverse” claims I’ve seen floating around. It won’t in fact it’s a dedicated feature of activitypub and has been in use since forever, instances are able to block ones that go against their values either due to the way those instances are operated or the users they allow on them. This is how it’s worked since the beginning and almost certainly how it will continue. Some users don’t like this and believe that they should be able to access stuff no matter what, failing to realize that they do not own the server their account is hosted on, accessing content on other servers via activitypub requires the content be copied over to your home server, and if the admins don’t want that they can block that server, you don’t really have a say in it because it isn’t your server. So either host your own where you do own it, or move to a more open protocol which exist for the purpose of user freedom and anti-censorship.

        • Corgana@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          What do you think it’s about? Because from my perspective changing instances is kind of the entire defining feature that separates it from commercial platforms.

        • agitatedpotato@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          I feel like that’s exactly how it was billed to me, find somewhere that federates with who you want, and if that changes, you’re free to move

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

              Some of the time it is though. Like Gmail has a pretty large list of IPs it won’t deliver email from. When self-hosting, it’s something you really do have to worry about.

              The reason most people don’t worry about it is that most people only use a handful of free emails and organizations that provide email addresses for their users spend time worrying about it so users don’t have to.

              • woelkchen@lemmy.worldM
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                When self-hosting, it’s something you really do have to worry about.

                So erecting artificial walls is not positive then. Good we’re on the same page.

                • candybrie@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  9 months ago

                  No. I definitely prefer email with good spam blocking. I’m not criticizing Google for blocking mail how they do. It’s pretty necessary. Which is also something you learn fairly quickly if you try to self host.

    • helenslunch@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      9 months ago

      Please explain how federating with Threads is “supporting Meta” and not the opposite.

      • aldalire@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        9 months ago

        I’m not sure if federating will help meta so much as it will definitely (most probably) hurt the lemmy/mastodon network.

        Here’s a similar case that happened before, with the XMPP protocol being coopted by google but eventually killing it in favor of their own proprietary solution:

        https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html

        Big tech isn’t on our side, and we have to handle outside corporate influence with heavy skepticism.

    • aldalire@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      96
      ·
      9 months ago

      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.

    • xantoxis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      75
      ·
      9 months ago

      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.

      • Otter@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        30
        ·
        9 months ago

        I don’t think that’s what they’re saying.

        They’re saying that some users and admins might choose to wait and see

        • ttmrichter@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          9 months ago

          “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!”

          • Otter@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            I don’t want to use their platform, but I get why some people might choose to stay federated so that there is incentive to pull people to mastodon and educate people about the issues

            There’s enough nuance there that I’m not dead set on either side, and I think we still have the chance to defederate later if there’s an increase in spam and harmful content / disinformation.

            • ttmrichter@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              9 months ago

              “Jeffrey doesn’t always eat people. Just sometimes. We should totally go clubbing with him and spurn him later if he eats one of us.”

      • xigoi@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        I don’t want to join a proprietary service, but I want to be able to communicate with people who chose to join it.

    • Otter@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      69
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Great thing about the fediverse

      People get to decide what they want from their platform

      • DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        9 months ago

        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.

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

        Exactly, I hereby decide that I would like to ignore corporate efforts to undermine this burgeoning new platform. I furthermore reserve the right to complain about the loss of said platform in future years by claiming that it’s everyone elses fault for allowing corporate encroachment.

      • pyrflie@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        They don’t get to block instances yet.

        The ability to block Instances/Threads by user would make this a non-issue.

    • net00@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      9 months ago

      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.

      • capital@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        The above is solvable if you block them I guess, but by default it will completely ruin everything.

        Yes. One minute of a user’s time and all that’s gone.

        Compare that with having to move instances due to admins blocking at the instance level.

      • xigoi@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        How about adding a feature to “unlist” an instance, where you could interact with it normally, but its posts wouldn’t show up in All, Popular, etc.?

    • Draconic NEO@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      9 months ago

      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.

      • ttmrichter@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        You understand that no matter how much you kneel down to service Meta, Zuck the Fuck won’t be trickling anything down on you that isn’t a bodily fluid, right?

        And hey, I’m not going to kink-shame. Just pointing out that if that isn’t your specific kink, you might want to wake up to there being zero dollars trickling down to you.

        • Asuka@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          What a meaningless, worthless comment. Letting Threads federate with the rest of the Fediverse doesn’t give Zuckerberg power over us (unless you’d care to explain how it does) - rather, it just gives its users and our users the ability to interacted. Why are you so interested in building walls?

          • ttmrichter@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            I swear, I’m seeing the western equivalent of wumaos servicing Meta here. Only at least the wumaos got paid; it made sense. These idiots are doing the labour for free!

                • Asuka@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Again, you are not replying to the content of my comment. You want socialism to be taken seriously as an ideology? Not making everything a shitpost could be a good place to start.

    • redfellow@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Generally, yes. Perhaps unpopularly, I don’t need to decide about suddenly having meta content in Lemmy. I expect that’s not ever gonna happen.

      Having Elongated Musk or Fart Suckerberg in my stream cannot be the default, but at best, opt in.

  • lemmesay@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    108
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    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.

  • SharkEatingBreakfast@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    105
    ·
    9 months ago

    Comment stolen from user “copygirl” from blahaj.zone:

    Looks like they’ll be harvesting your data if you follow anyone from Threads, maybe even injecting ads. Unsure what happens to the data of people that get followed by a Threads user. A large part of the fediverse is here precisely because they want to escape corporate meddling, data-hoarding, advertising and other anti-user malpractices. There’s a number of people talking about this, here’s a recent post that highlights some of the things from their TOS.

  • letsmakeafriendship@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    93
    ·
    9 months ago

    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.

  • Margot Robbie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    80
    ·
    9 months ago

    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.

  • MajorHavoc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    ·
    9 months ago

    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.

  • Creatortray@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    67
    ·
    9 months ago

    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.

    • Cypher@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      88
      ·
      9 months ago

      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.

      • danc4498@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        9 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
          ·
          9 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
            ·
            9 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
          ·
          9 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
                ·
                9 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
                  9 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.

        • DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 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.

      • Creatortray@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        9 months ago

        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.

        • Spuddlesv2@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          9 months ago

          What point in that linked blog swayed you? The circumstances are quite different. XMPP was dogshit when Google started working with it. ActivityPub is light years ahead.

          • Creatortray@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            9 months ago

            I really don’t know enough to say one way or the other, but the fact that this is an established Microsoft practice swayed me. I can actually believe google didn’t intend to do what it did to xmpp as a log of google employees from the 2000’s speak highly of the company, but these executives are traded like nfl players, and i know enough about meta’s history to believe they may do this. Besides I’m still new to development, but i don’t see many other reasons why it would take meta nearly a year to fully launch federation.

            Actually this just occurred to me, but isn’t it interesting which accounts were linked first?

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

              Triple-E predates Microsoft. IBM was doing it before Bill Gates was a twinkle in the mailman’s eye.

    • Dieinahole@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      44
      ·
      9 months ago

      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

      • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        9 months ago

        But that’s good. Meta doesn’t care about Lemmy or Mastodon because they’re tiny. Threads is a threat to Twitter. They want to integrate with Mastodon just because Twitter doesn’t. That’s it.

        They’re not going for “total control” of your conversation about Gaza. You are not important to them. You are not the main character in some David and Goliath story. There are only Goliaths.

        • xantoxis@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          9 months ago

          Do you know why Facebook paid a billion dollars for Instagram? Instagram wasn’t worth that much. It wasn’t generating a billion dollars in revenue. It probably still doesn’t.

          Facebook bought Instagram because Instagram was a growing app that was popular with a demographic Facebook wanted to control. They spent a billion dollars to eliminate a growing threat.

          Mastodon and, to a lesser extent, Lemmy, represent a growing threat. Not a very big one right now, but it could become a bigger one. It could become another billion dollar problem for the goliaths on the Internet, in a few years. They need to have total control, if a social media app starts to fragment it just collapses instead as users decide to go wherever the other users are.

          Facebook’s 1000:1 user ratio would make Lemmy irrelevant and stave off that billion dollar problem for Facebook down the road. An incredibly cheap way to kill a tiny but growing competitor.

          • xigoi@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Facebook’s 1000:1 user ratio would make Lemmy irrelevant

            That’s the case whether or not you federate with Threads. But if you do, that’s not going to matter because you can freely communicate with people on Threads.

        • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          9 months ago

          They don’t want to federate because Twitter does not.

          But neither to “extinguish” Mastodon or so. They need it as a defense like Google uses Mozilla, showcasing that not only do they enjoy competition, they in fact actively support it, by making their content available over there, too.

          Because like you say, the entirely metaverse is so tiny compared to meta, thy could not give a flying fuck whatever the reason if it’s about anything competitive. But they can utilize the tiny underdog as a shield from criticism. And that’s valuable to them.

      • G020B@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        9 months ago

        There is one big reason why they would care - antitrust and EU regulation protection. They have no intention to destroy the platform Rather they want to please the regulators as they are leveraging the open standards. The EEE strategy is a conspiracy theory. Government regulations are the most probable reason for this change.

      • Creatortray@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        9 months ago

        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

      • ttmrichter@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        Why in THE FUCK would meta notice, or care, at fucking all?

        Why do people ask rhetorical questions without following through?!

        This is a question that should be asked. If, indeed, the fediverse is so unimportant WHY THE FLYING FUCK IS META INTERESTED IN FEDERATING WITH IT!?!? THAT is the question people should be asking, given that Meta does nothing that isn’t designed to add more money to Zuck the Fuck’s portfolio.

        And yet … most people (for clarity, I don’t mean you here!) don’t ask that question. They don’t take that question you ask and wonder beyond that first kneejerk level. Use that question instead as a “LOL Meta doesn’t care about the fediverse” piece of evidence.

        And this is why we can’t have nice things.

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

        The fediverse is an emerging threat. It’s not ready yet, but it’s on the right trajectory. Every time there’s angst on some other platform, the fediverse get’s a bump. Fediverse is not a real competitor yet, perhaps it never will be, but for meta it’s sensible to establish a presence here in the short term, because it may be much more difficult later.

      • Freeman@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Threads doesnt have that much users I think. Fb, insta and whatsapp do have a lot of users but I dont expect a lot of users comming from there

    • Sanyanov@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      9 months ago

      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.

      • MrSilkworm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        9 months ago

        this ☝️. Those of us who remember what happened then, understand the potential dangers of federating with a juggernaut like META.

        We should tread lightly!

      • helenslunch@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        This forced many XMPP users to get into Google’s ecosystem

        No it didn’t

        As a result, XMPP became worse off than it started

        Wrong again.

        • kpw@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          This. I don’t care what Google or Meta do, I will never use their services.

            • nakal@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              9 months ago

              Also, I doubt that Google wanted to destroy XMPP. They simply needed a chat then noticed it’s crap for mobile devices. They wanted to offer their users seemless migration to the new proprietary protocol.

              I was sad that Google stopped to use an official standard, but there are many better free options left.

              • kpw@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                9 months ago

                XMPP works great on mobile devices today. Google could have easily developed and published such extensions themselves.

          • kpw@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            Why? It works great for me and my contacts. I use it for all my personal messaging.

            • Spuddlesv2@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              When Google started using XMPP in Talk, 20 years ago, it was crap. I haven’t used it in probably 15 years but it wasn’t great then either.

              • kpw@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                9 months ago

                Then it must have gotten a lot better in the meantime then. I discovered it ~2020 while searching for alternatives to WhatsApp and realizing that other walled gardens cannot be the answer since they have the same problem as WhatsApp. I think we should revive the idea of an universal internet standard for instant messaging.

        • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          9 months ago

          No it’s not in the least bit, but because people keep reposting that angry blog post by someone who was personally involved and wanted someone to blame so they blamed Google (as if XMPP needed any outside help to fail to catch on, they could do it on their own perfectly fine), people believe that narrative and then get sold on Meta wanting to the same with the Fediverse. As if they could give a flying fart (just like with Google and XMPP).

    • APassenger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      9 months ago

      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.

    • Nelfaneor@mastodon.zaclys.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      9 months ago

      @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

  • corbin@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    66
    ·
    9 months ago

    How about users make decisions for themselves and block Threads if they want?