The only positive I can see coming from “Threads” is, that people are aware of Twitter alternatives and probably learn about Mastodon too. But most people on Facebook and Instagram don’t care that is the company Facebook behind it. Therefore they would not care about Mastodon either. Or any other alternative similar to it, as there are not millions of people.
As for Threads, I think it will stay relevant. Will it take over Twitter? Maybe, probably not. They do not federate with Activity Pub, therefore it is not relevant to me. “Just” another service I don’t care, similar to Tik Tok. And to be honest here, I would like them to federate.
There’s been lots of discussions about this already, but the short version is that this is a play book tactic used by big companies to take over a sector.
I didn’t experience this at the time, so the details might be off, but one example, as I understand it, is what Google did with Google Messages a decade ago or so. They federated using some other service that existed before Activity Pub I think, and most casual users just flocked to it with no idea about any federation. Once it got big, they just stopped federating, and anyone who was not on Google Messages but had friends who were (which most did since GM was so popular) had to change to GM.
Other similar such things have happened before with other products and in other markets, and that’s what people fear will happen with threads.
I don’t understand. What problems do you mean? It is “just” another Activity Pub after all, if it is federating in and out, like any other Activity Pub federated community.
The first problem is that Beehaw can barely handle the load it has now, if you connect it to 100 million people and just one post or comment gains traction, Beehaw gets the experience of an accidental DDoS attack.
There are many other technical and social issues that will be created. Some of which have easy solutions some of which may not have any solutions at all, none of which I want to deal with.
People are going the reddit hivemind again in lemmy.
Just repeating in echo chambers without rationale.
If you look at my history, I’ve been trying to get some useful information regarding Threads, but have received much less useful comments than I would even receive on reddit.
Personally, I’d really like to access to Threads from my anonymous account on another instance, since Threads account is strictly tied to an Instagram account.
I guess it’s the nature of social media nowadays. Lots of noise, very little actual signal.
There’s been lots of discussions about this already, but the short version is that this is a play book tactic used by big companies to take over a sector.
I didn’t experience this at the time so the details might be one, but one example, as I understand it, is what Google did with Google Messages a decade ago or so. They federated using some other service that existed before Activity Pub I think, and most casual users just flocked to it with no idea about any federation. Once it got big, they just stopped federating, and anyone who was not on Google Messages but had friends who were (which most did since GM was so popular) had to change to GM.
Other similar such things have happened before with other products and in other markets, and that’s what people fear will happen with threads.
Except reddit or lemmy doesn’t have a big concept of persistent friends or connections.
Why would you care where some random moves to? I don’t know anyone here and no one knows me. That’s the beauty of it. That’s why it’s different than other platforms and past occurrences.
You don’t need the friends, that is just one example. You have to think of the general concept and logic; Lemmy, as well as kbin, have communities. If one place manages to secure all or most major communities, they can pull the same thing. And Threads is meant to be a Twitter replacement, so you do have the bit about connections, as well as influencers. It’s like Mastodon, but completely centralized.
So the same logic applies: if Threads joins the Fediverse and most people go to Threads, then most users who are not on Threads will still end up having a lot of discussions on Threads and following a lot of people there. Then some day, once Threads gets big enough, it will stop federating and Fediverse users will be forced to move if they want to keep those connections. Meanwhile, Mastodon dies. Lemmy and kbin might survive because they fill a different niche; however, if instances start federating with Threads and making it possible to follow people on there, then the same exodus will happen.
We can learn from history, or we can let it repeat itself. Federating with Threads would mean a huge failure to learn from history. And then maybe ten years later you’ll be the one trying to warn someone else as they tell you how that time it’s totally different.
The only positive I can see coming from “Threads” is, that people are aware of Twitter alternatives and probably learn about Mastodon too. But most people on Facebook and Instagram don’t care that is the company Facebook behind it. Therefore they would not care about Mastodon either. Or any other alternative similar to it, as there are not millions of people.
As for Threads, I think it will stay relevant. Will it take over Twitter? Maybe, probably not. They do not federate with Activity Pub, therefore it is not relevant to me. “Just” another service I don’t care, similar to Tik Tok. And to be honest here, I would like them to federate.
You had me until the last sentence.
Why? I mean by federating to both sides equally. That’s the point of Activity Pub, isn’t it? Instances can still block them if they wish to.
Copy pasted from my other comment:
There’s been lots of discussions about this already, but the short version is that this is a play book tactic used by big companies to take over a sector.
I didn’t experience this at the time, so the details might be off, but one example, as I understand it, is what Google did with Google Messages a decade ago or so. They federated using some other service that existed before Activity Pub I think, and most casual users just flocked to it with no idea about any federation. Once it got big, they just stopped federating, and anyone who was not on Google Messages but had friends who were (which most did since GM was so popular) had to change to GM.
Other similar such things have happened before with other products and in other markets, and that’s what people fear will happen with threads.
Because it will create more problems than I want to deal with.
I don’t understand. What problems do you mean? It is “just” another Activity Pub after all, if it is federating in and out, like any other Activity Pub federated community.
The first problem is that Beehaw can barely handle the load it has now, if you connect it to 100 million people and just one post or comment gains traction, Beehaw gets the experience of an accidental DDoS attack.
There are many other technical and social issues that will be created. Some of which have easy solutions some of which may not have any solutions at all, none of which I want to deal with.
Then just defederate like they did with the other instances.
It seems like you don’t want to understand.
People are going the reddit hivemind again in lemmy.
Just repeating in echo chambers without rationale.
If you look at my history, I’ve been trying to get some useful information regarding Threads, but have received much less useful comments than I would even receive on reddit.
Personally, I’d really like to access to Threads from my anonymous account on another instance, since Threads account is strictly tied to an Instagram account.
I guess it’s the nature of social media nowadays. Lots of noise, very little actual signal.
There’s been lots of discussions about this already, but the short version is that this is a play book tactic used by big companies to take over a sector.
I didn’t experience this at the time so the details might be one, but one example, as I understand it, is what Google did with Google Messages a decade ago or so. They federated using some other service that existed before Activity Pub I think, and most casual users just flocked to it with no idea about any federation. Once it got big, they just stopped federating, and anyone who was not on Google Messages but had friends who were (which most did since GM was so popular) had to change to GM.
Other similar such things have happened before with other products and in other markets, and that’s what people fear will happen with threads.
Except reddit or lemmy doesn’t have a big concept of persistent friends or connections.
Why would you care where some random moves to? I don’t know anyone here and no one knows me. That’s the beauty of it. That’s why it’s different than other platforms and past occurrences.
You don’t need the friends, that is just one example. You have to think of the general concept and logic; Lemmy, as well as kbin, have communities. If one place manages to secure all or most major communities, they can pull the same thing. And Threads is meant to be a Twitter replacement, so you do have the bit about connections, as well as influencers. It’s like Mastodon, but completely centralized.
So the same logic applies: if Threads joins the Fediverse and most people go to Threads, then most users who are not on Threads will still end up having a lot of discussions on Threads and following a lot of people there. Then some day, once Threads gets big enough, it will stop federating and Fediverse users will be forced to move if they want to keep those connections. Meanwhile, Mastodon dies. Lemmy and kbin might survive because they fill a different niche; however, if instances start federating with Threads and making it possible to follow people on there, then the same exodus will happen.
We can learn from history, or we can let it repeat itself. Federating with Threads would mean a huge failure to learn from history. And then maybe ten years later you’ll be the one trying to warn someone else as they tell you how that time it’s totally different.