I’ve been hearing that Meta (Facebook) intends to join the fediverse. I have some very big concerns about that, as do apparently many others. There exists a group of instances called the fedipact which will not be federating with Meta, and I was wondering if this instance would be joining. So there is no ambiguity with this post: I have no desire to participate in any instance that is federated with Facebook, and will kindly pass on another Eternal September. Hope that doesn’t come off as aggressive, that’s just where I’m at.
You must log in or register to comment.
We know what Meta is, how they operate, how they collect and abuse data, how they prioritize ad revenue over user experience, how they’ve abused and manipulated elections, how they center whiteness, etc. What is there to wait and see?
Zuck: I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS
[Redacted Friend’s Name]: What? How’d you manage that one?
Zuck: People just submitted it.
Zuck: I don’t know why.
Zuck: They “trust me”
Zuck: Dumb f–ks.
I’m with you on Meta not being welcome in the fediverse. u/masquenox made a comment that explains why really well here: https://lemmy.world/comment/854031
Really liked the final comment.
I do still hold the view blocking them isn’t the right answer, maybe its needless optimism, I understand the idea of meta developing it’s own fork, but if you can already have this many people agreeing to blovk them I feel a condition could already be negotiated (like instances will inly federate if the code is open source) instead of blocking outright. I feel this is the nuclear option and there are still unexplored solutions.
Problem for me is that, I don’t like an image of the fediverse where we just block any big service that comes our way, we all stand more to gain if we manage to get federating right, even if it requires putting up conditions for that federation to be done.
Also I don’t think mastodon or the fediverse at large would not survive one of those services suddenly defederating (or violating the hypothetical condition, thus for ing everyone to block them), this is probably where my hopeless optimism comes into play, but the community already built here is pretty tech savvy and we are already at numbers capable of self sustaining, I feel the community would not die out if we loose access to whatever one of those big services was offering.
Still this federation shouldn’t affect lemmy that much since it’s geared towards mastodon like microblogging services right now, so I will stand by whatever this community decides.
This is the first that I’m hearing about this and I will need to read into it more. I personally am up for blocking meta instances, though this is something that I will need to consult with the community and instance users first before taking action. For the moment I’m focusing on server updates/stability etc. Once I’m happy with how everything is running I will come back and consult with everyone how we would like to approach this. I will always consult the community before making instance defining decisions such as this.
I’m perfectly fine with blocking Meta, any megacorp really, but Meta especially. I have relatives who are still unvaccinated and afraid of 5G radio towers because of some nonsense they read on Facebook.
So even after all the people dropping dead from the vax you’re still for it… Interesting.
deleted by creator
It’s an odd reason to hate meta, but hey the enemy of my enemy…
With the financial resources at its disposal, Meta is an a position to dominate the rest of the Fediverse. It is technically true that an open source project allows people to set up their own instances and migrate, but there are a great many ways in which the rest of the Fediverse could become dependent on the single largest player, especially because Meta’s closed-source, for-profit, data-mining operation is inimical to everything the Fediverse stands for. Even if people are only on Mastodon and not on Facebook, if Facebook can connect to them, it increases Facebook’s value, and it decreases the incentive to break free. In addition, money corrupts. Do I want my friends on Facebook to be able to connect with the Fediverse? Of course. But am I interested in accomplishing it by allowing ourselves to become remoras on the belly of the Great White Meta Shark? Not really. Of course, the beauty of the Fediverse is that people can choose for themselves, but I vote to defederate. Those who ride the back of the tiger all too often end up inside. Mark Zuckerberg, please go ruin someone else’s day.
Thanks for posting this! I had no idea. I’m 100% for blocking any and all Meta instances! Zuckerberg and his greedy hands can suck it
I don’t want Meta or the Zuck to benefit in any way from any work I do posting on the fediverse.
And defederating would prevent that because…?
Because his posts, comments and overall activity will not be shown in Meta’s instance
I hope we do block any meta instances, it feels like having over that sketchy cousin you try to cut off cause he always steals from your house. Like no, stay away from me please
👍 👏
We don’t need that **** in the fediverse.
Facebook is notorious for getting hacked – yet another reason for not federating with Meta.
I think facebook is more secure than a random lemmy instance.
But facebook + lemmy is still worse, no?
If facebook can’t collect more data then they could get by web scraping (which they do), then I see no reason why we wouldn’t want more people here.
Eh, like in the previous hread about defederating from Burggit I’m against defederating in general. Heck I picked this instance in particular because it wasn’t blocking anyone and wasn’t blocked by anyone, so it gave me the most flexibility in what I could see.
I’d change my position if and when Meta makes any proprietary changes to the protocol or seemingly intentional “misimplementations” of it that impact interoperability.
Same, if needed, I want to be the one doing the blocking. It’s not like I’m averae to the idea of blocking, but I like being the one shaping what I can see and what I won’t
The thing is a database can be used from different applications, so it can have a normal lemmy/mastodon instance working on it and other applications that only read and analyze data.
If meta is putting it’s dirty hands on this it’s to male profit and violate our privacy. If we federate with it it will have access to our data as well to analyze. I dont want that.
same, but i have to add
I’d change my position if and when Meta makes any proprietary changes to the protocol or seemingly intentional “misimplementations” of it that impact interoperability.
This implies that the problem will come after they try to change anything. However, there are many things they can do without changing the protocol.
- With their growth in population they can create centralized communities that others will follow or try to participate in. This ecosystem, once acquired, can be ransomed for favors. What happens when Facebook implies, not through an announcement but through precedent, that anyone who doesn’t defederate Burggit will lose access to certain communities that are now big enough to be “core” communities?
- Other stuff I can’t be bothered to type but can be summed up as “through sheer size and force, their power will grow until their reach is so deep entrenched into our lair, that our walls will turn to acid and our halls the beast’s stomach.”
that having been said, i couldn’t give two shits about meta so i don’t think we should be preemptively trying to defederate without even thinking about it thoroughly. I’m personally, similarly to you, here cuz I don’t want defederations to happen. Hopefully we stay free. :)
Enjoy your corporations and hate speech then!
Why do you think I’m here if not for that? 😎😎 I come for the promise of being threatened with genocide and slavery for being a minority. If not for that I’d be on Reddit, being safe and all! No, being abused has its own joys in life and I am not one to be left out.
Came to add exactly this! I looked at a table of instances and only considered ones that had few blocks when I was signing up. I’m not sure if I should be so quick to turn around on that principle unless there’s a concrete reason too.
Like those damn dirty neutrals, I don’t feel strongly one way or another. But I really love that if you hate the way our instance goes on this you’re free to just move to another instance that shares your views. And you’ll be doubly free when they get account migration up and running.
Long live Vlemmy, and may there always be a bounty of other options.
I don’t really understand why anyone would not federate with Meta…what is the issue? Can they gather any information they couldn’t otherwise?
I’m curious what the downside of being federated with an Instance run by Meta is? By federating with the network, Meta won’t miraculously gain some authoritarian control over the entire thing. In fact federating with Meta may well provide the largest opportunity ever to bring new users over to sites like Lemmy and Mastodon by way of exposing them to the potential perks of those sites over Thread.
Not to sound elitist but one of the main reasons I want nothing to do with it is the almost guaranteed influx of normies and casuals. Additionally, Meta does not want to see the fediverse or any other social network grow, they want everyone to use their network and pay them.
I must say, your first reason is kind of asshole, I can understand wanting some communities to remain niche to an extent, but for the whole service just because casuals would join… I don’t know, it feels like useless gatekeeping, especially if those people were still bringing content.
They will have the money to run more bigger faster severs. The risk is the majority start to use those severs as home, then communities end up there, then Facebook end up controlling the communities.
So the threat is Meta offering a better service that draws a user base? Is that flexibility not the entire thesis of fediverse platforms?
Further, if Meta is able to provide a service that users see as so fundamentally better, then they should get a large portion of the population. That’s the nature of a competitive market.
That is the “embrace” part of embrace, extend, extinguish. It is great at first, but once they have that base all in one place it will be monetized and there will be none of the smaller sites left.
But the nature of the federated platforms is that they will always be able to have new instance created that can still access the content of the largest, without explicitly needing that community to move over.
being netural is the best approach, this can backfire
Not taking a stand is an appeal to default, and because of the weight effect Meta will have thanks to money and resources, this will directly translate to letting Meta harm others.
