Yes, yes I know this is an unpopular opinion but let me give you guys an example that relates to this. You guys know email? Well if you had made an email instance and then Google made Gmail, would you guys block it? No. Just because it’s made by a big company does not mean you should block it. What if you wanted to talk to people on threads? What if you wanted more content because there is more users on there? Please don’t defederate from threads people.
Threads supporting activitypub is an attempt at a hostile takeover of the fediverse. Please read this article: https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html
Also, since you mentioned E-Mail, you’ll probably want to know how the exact same thing is happening there: http://www.igregious.com/2023/03/gmail-is-breaking-email.html?m=1
The fediverse isn’t as deeply integrated into our everyday lives as E-Mail, so we can still prevent it from being taken over by corporations.
Couldn’t have said it better myself. Federating with Threads would be more destructive than it would be beneficial, not to mention Meta’s horrible track record (FYI Meta was Facebook so everything Facebook did Meta also did, don’t ever forget that they’re connected).
Now I’m convinced that it’s a bad idea. Thoinks.
Yeah, the email example is an unintentional counterexample: it’s nearly impossible to run your own email server these days and not have your email rejected by everyone because the IP address is unrecognized and the spam filter is beyond reject-happy. To put it into fediverse terms: it’d be like federating with them, but where their CloudFlare DDOS protection blocks ActivityPub requests (this is actually what broke kbin’s federation a week or two ago so it’s not just a hypothetical!).
Yeah, in effect all of email is already federated. Shared protocols won. It’s literally the opposite of what people are imagining is going to happen here.
I’m sorry but these arguments don’t hang together for me. The point of email is that you need to be able to communicate with everyone. That’s why blacklisting of self hosted services is forcing everyone into the big guys. But the people using the fediverse are already happy only being able to communicate with other fediverse members, so being excluded harms absolutely nothing. The fediverse was created at a point where monolithic social networks already existed, by people who wanted to get away from those things. We excluded ourselves right at the start.
The same goes for XMPP. If it was already viable as a communication platform, it would have been fine. It died off because it was always going to die off. Better alternatives existed. Google briefly interfacing with XMPP didn’t kill it, it put it on life support.
No, given meta’s track record they will somehow for sure fuck up the fediverse. Keep in the mind this is the same company that who’s algorithm helped spread hate and resulted in a genocide of the Rohingyas in Myanmar.
I would much rather keep a company like that out of my life as much as possible.
No, they try to kill the fediverse.
No thank you. I’ve done my best to keep everything Meta out of my life (and by extension, Twitter, TikTok, YouTube, etc), despite peer pressure. Throughout its history, Meta (basically le Zuck and friends) have demonstrated their unquenchable greed and with it their immeasurable ego to justify their actions, however immoral.
I don’t use Gmail. I pay for a service that provides me email and respects my privacy. If you want to use Gmail, be my guest. Should you? Definitely not. Same goes for Facebook, Whatsapp, Instagram and the latest incarnation: Threads. If I want to talk to people on Threads, I’ll create a Threads account.
Dunno about anyone else, but if we do, I’m moving to a different instance that chose not to.
Are you willing to explain why? I couldn’t give two shits about anything that happens on Facebook / Threads / whatever else your racist grandpa is using, but I have not yet seen a credible argument for why being federated with them is bad.
I’m here to get away from the commercial socials. I don’t want more content or users for the sake of it, I want relevant content and users who are here because they also want to be here.
I’m going to vote this up for the discussion, but I don’t agree with your perspective.
On the surface you are correct that being able to speak to people who are on Threads would, in theory, be nice. The suspicion is that Meta is going for the EEE strategy. Allowing ourselves to be “embraced” would ultimately be damaging for the platform.
We’ve just started to move from Reddit to Lemmy and have shown we don’t need centralised, corporate-owned channels of communication. I don’t think we should stop this direction of travel when it comes to Threads.
I’m not sure your analogy about email services works here. Lemmy and Threads are not even close to being the same service as gmail or yahoo mail. It seems to me many people came to Lemmy to get away from companies like Meta though.
If you are on twitter, facebook, myspace, or youtube, you have to make an account on each of those platforms to talk to people there. None of them talk to each other.
Letting another platform connect to the Fediverse, that is a commercial entity (with a horrid reputation no less), is like trying to force MySpace and YouTube to talk to each other.
The Fediverse and meta are at completely opposite ends of the spectrum.
The majority of users in the Fediverse are actually being “social”.
Meta is running a business, harvesting your entire life for profit and selling it. Not to mention the “unsocial” way their algorithms force negativity into your lives.
I really don’t want my trash neighbors at the party.I will chime in for the sake of adding more votes to side of this being a bad idea (for all the reasons already stated). If you want to talk to people on threads, you can just log onto threads. The fediverse does not need to connect to every platform in existence. It’s okay to have multiple accounts on different websites for different things. We also don’t need to have infinite content, it’s fine to put your phone down every now and again.
I’m not fully convinced either way at this point: I’ve seen very good arguments for both sides.
Just wanna say that the kind of frank, open discussion without toxicity and name-calling is why I really like this instance and have high hopes for it.
What if you wanted to talk to people on threads?
Now the question is, do those people want to talk to you, a mere peasant? It’s clear that the random Joe perhaps wants to, but what about Oprah, Zuckerberg, Degeneres and the likes? Do they want to talk to people like us?
I think we should if and only if they share their content too. Their plan is not clear yet but rumours suggest their federation will likely be a single lane one (at least at “early” stages).
