That’s the problem. I can see a future where very few users and trolls “opt-in” to fediverse integration and for a while meta doesn’t rock the boat and actually contributes to the fediverse as a whole.

But Zuck would have us under ransom. All he has to do, if the fediverse starts threatening his business is turn on all accounts for federation, and it would quickly overwhelm the small independent operators. The fediverse would essentially be controlled by meta.

It’s the parable of the frog and the scorpion

[–] deweydecibel@lemmy.world 11 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

I think it more likely that over time, after threads has captured enough of the user base fleeing Twitter and other social media platforms, threads will start pushing a sub-fediverse of sorts that will involve most of the major fediverse platforms, i.e. the ones run by people who attend the get togethers Meta invites them to. Slowly but surely that will be cemented as the primary "section" of the fediverse, "the Meta-fediverse", and in order to join it, you'll have to commit to their standards. And just like that, the decentralized platform has become centralized.

They're willing to play with all the kids on the playground right now, but that will change. It's bizarre to me that the fediverse has such a strong population of left-leaning users, that all came here spitting on the capitalist-poisoned platforms they fled, and yet somehow there are so many people around here that don't see the danger of letting Meta in. They will find a way to fuck all of this up.

Committing to the idea of the fediverse will not benefit their bottom line in the long run. It is antithetical to the platform dominance that creates their profits.

[–] thenexusofprivacy@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

Yep. I very much agree with all of you. Here's how I phrased it in Embrace, Extend, and Exploit: Meta's plan for ActivityPub, Mastodon and the fediverse

Of course, if and when Meta sees the fediverse as a significant threat, they'll ruthlessly stamp it out.

But right now, they've got a huge potential longer-term opportunity to coopt the fediverse as a basis for decentralized surveillance capitalism. It might not work out, of course, but even if it doesn't keeping a neutered fediverse around might still be useful to Meta as long as it's not a threat to their dominance (just as Google subsidizes the Firefox browser).

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 3 points 7 months ago

I really don’t understand the fearmongering around this. If that happens, instances just defederate. At worst there is a few hours or days of chaos. Doesn’t seem like that big of a deal.

[–] GONADS125@feddit.de 14 points 7 months ago

i don’t know why they “trust me” dumb fucks

Real quote from Mark Fuckerburg.

yea so if you ever need info about anyone at harvard just ask i have over 4000 emails, pictures, addresses, sns

[–] Lemminary@lemmy.world 54 points 7 months ago (2 children)

This makes me nauseous. Block the fuckers out.

[–] Marsupial@quokk.au 17 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I blocked them on my instance last year. Fuck threads and any instance that goes along with them.

[–] warmaster@lemmy.world 16 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Lemmy.world looks like it will be federating, according to https://fedipact.veganism.social/

[–] GONADS125@feddit.de 8 points 7 months ago (1 children)

That's precisely why I left L.W. They also were removing community posts voicing opposition to threads federation. I witnessed it firsthand, where posts I commented in (and in which the majority of comments opposed it) were removed.

Now they removed the piracy communities again after promising not to. They are straight up untrustworthy and don't care about what their users actually want.

I am happy on feddit.de. They are defederated from Threads and the tankie instances.

[–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I’m curious, did you catch the reason listed on the mod log for the removals?

[–] GONADS125@feddit.de 2 points 7 months ago

I hadn't noticed until the posts were weeks old, so I didn't want to dig thru the mod log..

[–] rglullis 4 points 7 months ago (13 children)

If not Threads, what would you suggest to bring the billions of people who are stuck in legacy social media into the Fediverse?

If not Threads, how else can we convince small businesses to have an online presence beyond their Facebook pages?

If not Threads, how else do you want to bring mainstream media out of Twitter?

[–] prole@sh.itjust.works 21 points 7 months ago (6 children)

If not Threads, what would you suggest to bring the billions of people who are stuck in legacy social media into the Fediverse?

Why do we need to bring billions of people here again?

load more comments (6 replies)

[–] the_post_of_tom_joad@sh.itjust.works 11 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (3 children)

I don't need or want those assholes here. Why do i want small business here? Why do i want facebook idiot grammas here? What would the point be? Fuck threads

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 12 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Seconded. There’s no need to have them here. The toxicity of FB, “fake news”, and the trolling that goes with it can stay the hell away from the fediverse. There’s enough to deal with here with issues from places like hexbear, CSAM, and whatever else, we don’t need knuckledraggers posting “only ‘60s kids will get this” BS along with “each upvote is a prayer for trump” or some shit.

[–] GlitterInfection@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

Plus this thread is more than toxic enough as it is.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] SuperSynthia@lemmy.world 11 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Eternal September

[–] rglullis 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Can you elaborate?

[–] pezhore@lemmy.ml 9 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

Not the OP, but Eternal September references the massive culture impact on Usenet when ISPs started lowering the barrier to joining the then somewhat exclusive forum-esque part of the internet.

[–] independantiste@sh.itjust.works 9 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Gatekeeping the fediverse while also wanting it to stay alive and to not be "EEE" my meta won't work unfortunately.

[–] pezhore@lemmy.ml 7 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I agree, but it's a hard pill to swallow that Meta is the best partner to grow the fediverse. There are real lessons to learn from Embrace, Extend, Extinguish (look at XMPP and Google), not to mention privacy concerns and content moderation issues that seem to be a "feature" for Meta products vs bugs.

I'm not sure what Zuck is up to, but for whatever it's worth I think the best think the fediverse can do is be somewhat reactive to Meta's movements.

If instances start getting overwhelmed with content, then block.

If Meta starts showing signs of EEE, then instances can block.

And us users can move to instances that we feel match our personal stances on things - hate Facebook like the plague? Look at one of the defederated/blocking instances. Do you miss interacting with a larger audience? Stay on instances that are embracing (or withholding judgment) the Meta federation.

It's a complex topic to be sure, and the only way we'll know the right way to deal with it is with the benefit of hindsight in a few years

[–] the_post_of_tom_joad@sh.itjust.works 5 points 7 months ago

Just thinking about all the meta bots and shills meta could bring to the table gets me excited. Mmmm astroturf

[–] shnizmuffin@lemmy.inbutts.lol 2 points 7 months ago

If Meta starts showing signs of EEE, then instances can block.

Well it looks like they're at the first E, there, buddy. Look at what they've already done to the internet, to your country, to the world. You want to give them the benefit of the doubt?

[–] rglullis 2 points 7 months ago

I used to have a 5-digit Slashdot ID, I am familiar with Eternal September. ;)

What I wanted to understand from OP is: what makes them think that the Fediverse (in general) in some type of enlightened vanguard that we should be "afraid" of the masses?

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago (10 children)

Slow, steady and sustainable growth through having a quality product.

load more comments (10 replies)

[–] grue@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

They can join a proper instance instead of a gigantic corporate-controlled one.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] can@sh.itjust.works 6 points 7 months ago

Why should I care about any of that? Let them come one by one if they're so inclined.

[–] Lemonparty@lemm.ee 5 points 7 months ago

If not Threads, how do we turn this FOSS venture free of corporate interference into a new avenue for a mega corporation to harvest all of our data for profit?

If not Threads, how will we ever ruin this place by turning it into Reddit?

If not Threads, who will I shill for?

[–] superduperenigma@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I don't want any of those things

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (5 replies)

[–] Vipsu@lemmy.world 14 points 7 months ago (1 children)

While Meta might have ulterior motives for fediverse integration this might also be just one way to comply with Europes new DMA regulation.

[–] cabbage@piefed.social 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The EU is pushing antitrust against tech monopolies for all it's worth. For anyone with half an eye on the EU it's glaringly obvious why Meta is doing this, and all the conspiracy theorists stumbling over each other on the Fediverse just look like clowns.

It's not about EEE, it's not about flooding the Fediverse with trolls (?) or about taking over the market share of Mastodon (??). It's about making a genuine-looking claim that they are not monopolist. Same reason they are working on the Signal protocol for WhatsApp.

It's not exactly rocket science. It's just successful regulation.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] RedStrider@lemmy.world 14 points 7 months ago

if threads does federate(i’ll believe it when i see it) im glad i’ll have a way to interact with irls who don’t know what a mastodon is without having to make an account on fb’s stuff.

if they ever do anything fishy, and they will. i’ll move instances.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 5 points 7 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

During the FediForum conference on Tuesday, Meta’s Peter Cottle showed off a brief demo of how users will eventually be able to connect their accounts and posts to the fediverse.

As you can see in the video below, which FediForum shared with The Verge, Cottle can navigate to his Threads account settings and toggle on an option called “fediverse sharing.” Meta will then show a pop-up explaining what exactly the fediverse is, along with some disclaimers Meta will flag to users so they know what they’re getting into.

First, Meta notes that users will need to have a public profile to toggle on the feature, something Instagram head Adam Mosseri has already mentioned.

In other words, your post may still be visible on, say, a linked Mastodon server, even if you decide to delete it with Threads.

“I think this is a downside of the protocol that we use today, but I think it’s important to let people know that if you post something and another server grabs a copy, we can’t necessarily enforce it,” Cottle says.

The FediForum is an online event that gives developers the opportunity to show off what they’re working on in the fediverse.

The original article contains 588 words, the summary contains 198 words. Saved 66%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] sabreW4K3@lazysoci.al 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

~~Wasn't this posted yesterday?~~

Edit: not here

[–] reagansrottencorpse@lemmy.ml 2 points 7 months ago

Lemmy.world will welcome them with open arms 😂

load more comments