this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2023
440 points (95.6% liked)

Fediverse

21070 readers
5 users here now

A community dedicated to fediverse news and discussion.

Fediverse is a portmanteau of "federation" and "universe".

Getting started on Fediverse;

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Made by Nume MacAroon at Veganism.social https://veganism.social/@nm

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] davel@lemmy.ml 103 points 2 years ago (23 children)

Some instances know their embrace, extend, extinguish history and some don’t.

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@startrek.website 55 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 10 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I still stand by that defederation as the only line of defense is a losing strategy. Keeping users siloed in Facebook's garden shouldn't be seen as a win for us.

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@startrek.website 57 points 2 years ago (13 children)

Keeping users siloed in Facebook’s garden shouldn’t be seen as a win for us.

Sometimes the only winning move is not to play. If people hadn't federated with google's XMPP back in the day, google wouldn't have had the same level of control it had to kill XMPP as a competitor.

We need to learn from the lessons of the past, and the past has resulted in the deaths of services when federating with corporations.

[–] sintrenton@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

"We should debate them... And defeat them on the Marketplace of Ideas." Yeah, right.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)
[–] davel@lemmy.ml 18 points 2 years ago (2 children)

What is your definition of win? Market share? Are you thinking in capitalist terms?

Nobody is forcing those people to use Facebook, and they are welcome to come here whenever they like.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (22 replies)
[–] Nougat@kbin.social 71 points 2 years ago (5 children)

The color codes and symbols aren't at all propagandist.

[–] pomodoro_longbreak@sh.itjust.works 80 points 2 years ago (4 children)

I mean technically, but it's not like it's trying to be subtle about it. From the page:

I believe that Facebook represents one of the gravest threats to democracies around the world [...]

The point is to discourage instances from federating with threads.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Masimatutu@mander.xyz 11 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Oh lol they changed the interface. Just a day ago or so the colours were the opposite.

edit: proof

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] GammaGames@beehaw.org 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I thought the same, then I saw the quote at the top of the page and realized it wasn’t strictly for information tracking

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MudMan@kbin.social 36 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Huh. You'd think more instances were blocking, given the amount of buzz.

Being generallky in favor of letting individual users make this call that's... mildly encouraging. Of course I happen to be in an instance that is blocking, so...

It's worth noting that this still splits Mastodon pretty much in half. That's arguably a bigger concern than anything else Meta may be doing. They may not even have to actually federate to break Mastodon, which is a very interesting dynamic.

[–] forensic_potato@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Is Lemmy.world not going to defederate from Threads? Did I miss something?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Levsgetso@lemmy.zip 19 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

There seems to a mistake saying that Threads is not blocked by lemmy.zip, when we defederated them months ago.

[–] Ziggurat@sh.itjust.works 17 points 2 years ago

It's somehow fun to see instance rules adding a clause about We do not federate with organization involved in Genocides

And a pitty that Meta is that Bad !

[–] EqMinMax@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

Am I the one who finds X federated in the status of this website as that instance is not federated ?

It also confuses me that it says like that instance is federated.

[–] bugsmith@programming.dev 16 points 2 years ago

Yes. I get the idea, because federating with them is the "negative" option, but honestly it's just confusing and overly opinionated for an infographic.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Alsephina@lemmy.ml 16 points 2 years ago

We gotta pump these numbers up

[–] GammaGames@beehaw.org 16 points 2 years ago (7 children)
[–] Masimatutu@mander.xyz 33 points 2 years ago (3 children)

"i am an instance admin/mod on the fediverse. by signing this pact, i hereby agree to block any instances owned by meta should they pop up on the fediverse. project92 is a real and serious threat to the health and longevity of fedi and must be fought back against at every possible opportunity"

fedipact.online

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 2 years ago

This is why I love DBZER0

[–] JokeDeity@lemm.ee 14 points 2 years ago

Not nearly enough.

[–] SpaceTurtle224@lemmy.world 13 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

I hope LW limits federation

[–] Dadifer@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Have the admins said anything? Why are we federated with them?

[–] DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yep. They don't care and they're going to keep federation with Facebook so "users have the choice to opt out"

Mastodon's largest instance is letting them in too

[–] TheBlackLounge@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago

The new Lemmy 19 allows users to block instances so that's not unreasonable for the largest instances. Gotta show new users that users have control.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Count042@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This is wrong. Rwn.lol blocked threads.net months ago.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DarkSpectrum@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (4 children)

If the Fediverse is truly the architecture of the future, then shouldn't it be able to stand any attempt by Meta to control it? If Meta is able to control it, then isn't it the wrong solution?

[–] iridaniotter@lemmygrad.ml 14 points 2 years ago

No, projects like the Fediverse require initial protectionism. If you let megacorporations into your project, they will dominate and gain control over how the protocol develops in the future. Google Chrome's huge share of users has enabled it to get dangerously close to locking other browsers out of most of the Internet (the Web Integrity API shenanigans are just the start). Chrome also removed support for JPEG XL, killing that attempt at a standard and enshrining its own WebP. It's called "Embrace, extend, and extinguish".

If the Fediverse actually wants to grow, it must unite against this. Otherwise we will end up with a couple hundred thousand Fedipact hardliners and millions on Facebook 2. No progress will have been made.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] cedarmesa@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago

Super useful

load more comments
view more: next ›