I strongly encourage instance admins to defederate from Facebook/Threads/Meta.

They aren’t some new, bright-eyed group with no track record. They’re a borderline Machiavellian megacorporation with a long and continuing history of extremely hostile actions:

  • Helping enhance genocides in countries
  • Openly and willingly taking part in political manipulation (see Cambridge Analytica)
  • Actively have campaigned against net neutrality and attempted to make “facebook” most of the internet for members of countries with weaker internet infra - directly contributing to their amplification of genocide (see the genocide link for info)
  • Using their users as non-consenting subjects to psychological experiments.
  • Absolutely ludicrous invasions of privacy - even if they aren’t able to do this directly to the Fediverse, it illustrates their attitude.
  • Even now, they’re on-record of attempting to get instance admins to do backdoor discussions and sign NDAs.

Yes, I know one of the Mastodon folks have said they’re not worried. Frankly, I think they’re being laughably naive >.<. Facebook/Meta - and Instagram’s CEO - might say pretty words - but words are cheap and from a known-hostile entity like Meta/Facebook they are almost certainly just a manipulation strategy.

In my view, they should be discarded as entirely irrelevant, or viewed as deliberate lies, given their continued atrocious behaviour and open manipulation of vast swathes of the population.

Facebook have large amounts of experience on how to attack and astroturf social media communities - hell I would be very unsurprised if they are already doing it, but it’s difficult to say without solid evidence ^.^

Why should we believe anything they say, ever? Why should we believe they aren’t just trying to destroy a competitor before it gets going properly, or worse, turn it into yet another arm of their sprawling network of services, via Embrace, Extend, Extinguish - or perhaps Embrace, Extend, Consume would be a better term in this case?

When will we ever learn that openly-manipulative, openly-assimilationist corporations need to be shoved out before they can gain any foothold and subsume our network and relegate it to the annals of history?

I’ve seen plenty of arguments claiming that it’s “anti-open-source” to defederate, or that it means we aren’t “resilient”, which is wrong ^.^:

  • Open source isn’t about blindly trusting every organisation that participates in a network, especially not one which is known-hostile. Threads can start their own ActivityPub network if they really want or implement the protocol for themselves. It doesn’t mean we lose the right to kick them out of most - or all - of our instances ^.^.
  • Defederation is part of how the fediverse is resilient. It is the immune system of the network against hostile actors (it can be used in other ways, too, of course). Facebook, I think, is a textbook example of a hostile actor, and has such an unimaginably bad record that anything they say should be treated as a form of manipulation.

Edit 1 - Some More Arguments

In this thread, I’ve seen some more arguments about Meta/FB federation:

  • Defederation doesn’t stop them from receiving our public content:
    • This is true, but very incomplete. The content you post is public, but what Meta/Facebook is really after is having their users interact with content. Defederation prevents this.
  • Federation will attract more users:
    • Only if Threads makes it trivial to move/make accounts on other instances, and makes the fact it’s a federation clear to the users, and doesn’t end up hosting most communities by sheer mass or outright manipulation.
    • Given that Threads as a platform is not open source - you can’t host your own “Threads Server” instance - and presumably their app only works with the Threads Server that they run - this is very unlikely. Unless they also make Threads a Mastodon/Calckey/KBin/etc. client.
    • Therefore, their app is probably intending to make itself their user’s primary interaction method for the Fediverse, while also making sure that any attempt to migrate off is met with unfamiliar interfaces because no-one else can host a server that can interface with it.
    • Ergo, they want to strongly incentivize people to stay within their walled garden version of the Fediverse by ensuring the rest remains unfamiliar - breaking the momentum of the current movement towards it. ^.^
  • We just need to create “better” front ends:
    • This is a good long-term strategy, because of the cycle of enshittification.
    • Facebook/Meta has far more resources than us to improve the “slickness” of their clients at this time. Until the fediverse grows more, and while they aren’t yet under immediate pressure to make their app profitable via enshittification and advertising, we won’t manage >.<
    • This also assumes that Facebook/Meta won’t engage in efforts to make this harder e.g. Embrace, Extend, Extinguish/Consume, or social manipulation attempts.
    • Therefore we should defederate and still keep working on making improvements. This strategy of “better clients” is only viable in combination with defederation.

PART 2 (post got too long!)

  • monsterovich@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    How Google killed XMPP

    Google didn’t kill XMPP, it died on its own. XMPP still lacks encryption by default and proper file transfers (there are 3 implementations of file transfers and all of them suck). The problem is that XMPP never had a normal protocol, and as a result, clients were forced to implement the features themselves through extensions which were not supported by all clients and servers. So it’s hard to blame Google for starting to do their own implementation of features. Matrix did everything better, but for some reason people don’t use it. They don’t, because there’s Telegram, Discord and so on.

    Don’t defend XMPP. It’s obsolete. If you want a federation, use Matrix.

    • sapient [they/them]@infosec.pubOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Matrix is definitely better. But that doesn’t mean Google didn’t help kill XMPP when the open protocol could absolutely have been pushed forward to fix the flaws.

    • ilir@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Matrix is bloatware.

      The resource consumption for chat rooms is absolutely ridiculous compared to XMPP and IRC. It’s so bad that I now believe the protocol is inherently flawed or absolutely unsuitable for realtime messaging.

      • XMPP: Good mature protocol but poor client ecosystem.
      • Matrix: Unsuitable protocol for realtime messaging with relatively good client ecosystem.
    • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Hello, I run a 5 user XMPP server for me and my friends Here is the deal in 2023 OMEMO encryption, which is forward secret, is enabled by default in most clients, and alerts you when it is broken But you are right that there are major flaws right now the need to be addressed

      #1 is notifications on Apple are broken by Apple, the only solution is getting non-apple friends. That sucks !

      That is the big big BIG problem

      The rest are mostly quality of life issues

      audio/video calls and conference calls mostly does not work

      posted links do not display OpenGraph summary, it just stays a cryptic URL

      OMEMO breaks serverside history, OpenGPG end-to-end encryption does not really work

      There are no message reactions “User X liked this comment”

      There are no message replies (User X replies to a specific comment )"

      There are no message deletion/message retraction

      Presence, as in the first P in XMPP is not more advanced than 1998 ICQ, online, away, dnd, invisible, offline, custom message , There is no real presence and multi-client largely breaks presence. Only good aspect of presence are message delivered / message read notification are they are spotty when using multiple clients

      These are really the bare minimum that XMPP needs to just to back as a peer in the “regular people actually using instant messaging” game No doubt, the apparent one way street of Google doing embrace, extend extinguish of the XMPP community didn’t help much. But it’s doubtful that it is google that caused XMPP to lag behind.

      And on the last note, most of the XMPP client are still under active development with regular monthly progress. Especially Conversation and Gajim are doing excellent work and I still keep my friend group on XMPP because I have hope that all the points above will get fixed at some point.

    • anachronist@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      I was there and I was using XMPP. Interacting with google chat slowly became the purpose of xmpp. Everyone who was using xmpp eventually found themselves talking mostly to google users. Then Google killed the link and every xmpp instance instantly became useless.

      We can (and are) building a community without facebook. Or we can link to facebook and find that they quickly through sheer mass become the center of the lemmy community. And then comes the knife.