I just read this point in a comment and wanted to bring it to the spotlight.

Meta has practically unlimited resources. They will make access to the fediverse fast with their top tier servers.

As per my understanding this will make small instances less desirable to the common user. And the effects will be:

  1. Meta can and will unethically defedrate from instances which are a theat to them. Which the majority of the population won’t care about, again making the small instances obsolete.
  2. When majority of the content is on the Meta servers they can and will provide fast access to it and unethically slow down access to the content from outside instances. This will be noticeable but cannot be proved, and in the end the common users just won’t care. They will use Threads because its faster.

This is just what i could think of, there are many more ways to be evil. Meta has the best engineers in the world who will figure out more discrete and impactful ways to harm the small instances.

Privacy: I know they can scrape data from the fediverse right now. That’s not a problem. The problem comes when they launch their own Android / iOS app and collect data about my search and what kind of Camel milk I like.

My thoughts: I think building our own userbase is better than federating with an evil corp. with unlimited resources and talent which they will use to destroy the federation just to get a few users.

I hope this post reaches the instance admins. The Cons outweigh the Pros in this case.

We couldn’t get the people to use Signal. This is our chance to make a change.

    • Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      What good does that do the small instances? And how does that harm Meta?

      All that happens is:

      • The small instances won’t get the extra activity that Meta users might bring
      • Meta will not get the small amount of existing content on those small instances

      That’s more a loss for us.

      • emerald@lemmy.place
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t really see how it’d be a loss. The fediverse has existed for a long time alongside big centralized social media, and Threads ostensibly having ActivityPub support doesn’t really change that.

        • Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The loss of potential growth opportunity… And all the potential negative effects happen anyway, no matter if you federate or not.

      • trambe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Ya pretty much double-edge sword

        On one hand, Instagram users can bring a ton of content, which “should” be good for the overall website

        On the other, it’s Meta lol

        • snooggums@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          If I wanted all of the Instagram content I would be on Instagram. I don’t want all of that content cluttering up another space and overwhelming another space.

          • fuzzzerd@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            The difference is here you can manage your own feed and pick and choose. Many folks don’t want metas apps on their device but wouldn’t mind some of the content. Folks that don’t want it don’t have to sub but those that do can benefit second hand.

        • alertsleeper@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t want Instagram content here! If I wanted Instagram-TikTok-type content I’d be there not here. I hope that crap stays away.

          And yes, it’s Meta lol

    • masterspace@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      How about you do that once Meta does anything other than run their own instance and help to popularize the concept of the fediverse?

        • blakerboy777@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          1 year ago

          We should be warry of anything big tech embraces. For example, Facebook reportedly uses servers running Linux. For that reason, we should all stop using Linux. Since Facebook has both an ios and an android app, we basically have to stop using our phones. We should shoot ourselves in the foot if there’s a chance we might get to bleed on them /s

            • blakerboy777@lemmy.one
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              To risk being serious here for a second- when Google+ launched, I remember being super bumbed out about how empty it felt and the fact that my friends couldn’t be on it yet because it was invite only. All the way back then, I had the idea that it would be really cool if there was a way for different social media websites to talk to each other directly instead of just users sharing links, so I could kind of take my friend group with me to Google+ even though they were still on Facebook. At the time I didn’t recognize either of them as really evil, I just though Google+ had a better interface. So all the way back then, 10+ years ago, I personally felt the lock in that established social networks had was way too strong for even well funded newcomers to overcome, and if there was some kind of standard for them to communicate with eachother, it would allow for a lot more innovation.

              Today, not only is my vague idea a reality in the form of ActivityPub, the largest social media company in the world is actually embracing that open standard and funneling it’s users towards it. In the future, other huge corporate backed social media companies might feel pressured to build around it as well. We might be heading towards the commodification of social media, where you give put your social handle like an email address, and anyone who wants to follow you can do so from Kbin, Mastodon, Peertube, Threads, Tumblr, etc…

              Today, I really do think of Meta and Mark Zuckerberg as genuinely evil. But I don’t look with suspicion on everything they do just because of that. For example, they typically do pay some amount of taxes. While I am suspicious that they aren’t paying enough, I don’t think theirs something inherently tainted about the money they pay with. That’s how I think about threads. It’s not currently federated. If I was suspicious of anything, it would be that being federated was a bold claim that brought a lot of attention to them, and that they might stall and even back out of ever doing it. That’s the play if you’re evil. If they actually federate, I view it as the fediverse has created such a great value proposition that supporting it enhances the value of Threads. Just because they are evil, it doesn’t mean everything they do is wrong and the opposite is right. Them being evil means they don’t do right reliably.

              I think we need to accept the fact that we live in a world with Big Companies and think about how they can be better than they were before. Right now, I think Meta is actually making a socially good decision to support ActivityPub. And it might also be good for them. But just because it’s good for them, it doesn’t mean it’s bad for us. If we can find a way to structure incentives so big company’s interests end up aligning with ours, we’ll be in a much better place. Better than just saying anything Meta does is automatically wrong and nothing will be good until they are totally gone.

  • ScaNtuRd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    299
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m hoping that ALL admins across the Fediverse will defederate from Meta. At least we get to have our own separate platform then.

    • jocanib@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That will just drive many Fedi-users to Meta.

      Different instances will make different decisions and users will go to the instances that suit their preferences. That’a how it is supposed to work and the only way it hurts the Fediverse is if we get flooded with threads complaining that other people have different preference, dammit.

    • amiuhle@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      106
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      They shouldn’t just defederate from Meta, they should defederate from any other instances that federate with Meta. Like a firewall against late stage capitalism

      • Mario Bariša@vlemmy.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        42
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        But that is a double-edged sword. What if, for example, mastodon.social doesn’t defederate with Meta, but you defederate mastodon.social? Now you’ve just cut yourself off from a huge portion of the fediverse. Admins should defederate from Meta if their community wants to do that, but defederating from other instances that didn’t do that is going a bit too far, in my opinion.

      • Elkaki123@vlemmy.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Why? If you have blocked meta shouldn’t you already be exempt from seeing comments and posts by their users on other instances? Why is this punitive approach needed

        Edit: (Alongside downvoting, an explanation might be better suited to change people’s minds, I just eant to know the advantage of this approach since you are excluding yourself from many users and you would have already blocked meta in this scenario)

        • amiuhle@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          You’d see comments and posts from their users on other instances that don’t block Meta.

          It’s unclear how many users you would actually exclude, I think a lot of users who are on the fediverse right now don’t want to have anything to do with Meta.

          As the fediverse grows, there will be different bubbles with not much interaction between those, mainly because some instances won’t be moderated while others will try to create discrimination free environments.

        • Spzi@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          If you have blocked meta shouldn’t you already be exempt from seeing comments and posts by their users on other instances?

          Yes, at least that’s how it is explained in How the beehaw defederation affects us, Back then, beehaw.org defederated from lemmy.world.

          Why do I see posts/comments from beehaw users on communities outside lemmy.world and beehaw.org?

          That’s because the “true” version of those posts is outside beehaw. So we get updates from those posts. And lemmy.world didn’t defederate beehaw, so posts/comments from beehaw users can still come to versions hosted on lemmy.world.

          The reverse is not true. Because beehaw defederate lemmy.world, any post/comment from a lemmy.world users will NOT be sent to the beehaw version of the post.

          Third instance communities

          Finally, we have the example of communities that are on instances that have not been defederated by beehaw.org.

          We can see all three of these versions look pretty similar. That’s because for the most part they are. We are identical with lemmy.ml, as lemmy.ml hosts the “true” version, and we get all updates from the “true” version. Beehaw.org will not get posts/comments from us, so beehaw actually doesn’t have the most “true” version of this community.

          Translated into the current context:

          • beehaw.org = your instance, which defederates from Threads
          • lemmy.world = Threads (sorry folks, just to eplain the mechanics)
          • lemmy.ml = another instance, which is federated with both, your instance and Threads

          Conclusions:

          • You wont see posts or commens from Threads users in that remote community. You also won’t see reactions to those activities from anyone, anywhere. It’s as if comment chains started by Threads users don’t exist.
          • Threads will not see posts and comments from you, even if done in communities from instances which are federated with Threads.

          Or what do you think, @amiuhle@feddit.de?

        • Saturdaycat@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’ve been on Instagram for 3 years trying to build up an art profile, sharing my artwork. I think it’s not Us vs Them, all sorts of people are spread out everywhere online.

          I’m happy to be here on the fediverse with my fediverse accounts, not threads. I’m extremely despondent about threads existing.

          • Calcharger@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            No reason to be despondent until they actually make the leap to the fediverse and we discuss what the plan is to federate. Threads will not automatically federated with everyone. We will have a long time to look at what threads is and what kind of content they will bring

          • Leraje@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            17
            ·
            1 year ago

            Based on your posts so far my friend, its becoming clearer why you think there’s no one to interact with.

            • masterspace@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              1 year ago

              Lol, ironically my comments in this thread going against the hive mind have gotten more interaction than any others

          • Calcharger@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            I am finding plenty of content to interact with here. It just might not be my first choice, but I’m getting along fine. It’s still early

          • VanillaGorilla@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            1 year ago

            If I was interested in those people and their content I could go there. I’m here because I absolutely do not want to see any of it.

            • masterspace@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              10
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I assume you only subscribed to text based subreddits then? Never once clicked on an image or gif that came from IG / Tiktok /etc.?

              My god stop being such a gatekeeping judgemental douche. Tons of reddit content was on subs like r/aww and /r/animalsbeingderps that was exactly as trite as the stuff posted on IG, if it wasn’t directly copied from it.

              • Calcharger@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                1 year ago

                I am on TikTok and was on Reddit. I like my FYP on TikTok. I go on Instagram to see what old friends are up to and the suggested content is awful and mean spirited. Same with Facebook. I don’t want that crap here

      • Anomander@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t think so; it won’t hurt ‘us’ anymore than we were hurt yesterday, when Threads hadn’t launched yet.

          • Xeelee@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            If we federate with Meta, we will be immediately drowned out by the huge user numbers of the Meta properties. They already have more users on day one than the entire fediverse.

      • kiddblur@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, I personally don’t want that. I want to be able to log in to mastodon or lemmy without needing a facebook account and be able to interact with my less tech savvy friends and family, as well as get news from journalists/bands/sports teams/etc.

      • TaleOfSam@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        49
        ·
        1 year ago

        Meta willingly under-moderated across large swaths of east Asia and Africa, leading to unchecked rumors and tangible acts of genocide. Zuckerberg has compared himself to Augustus Caesar.

        I think it’s acceptable to cut off a wildfire before it spreads.

        • masterspace@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          50
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Lemmy is run by a bunch of tankies and the entire fediverse is under-moderated.

          Cutting off a ton of users and content from the fediverse is stupid and everyone in here just keeps coming up with vague generalities because they’re scared of Meta rather than have actually thought through what will happen and be able to articulate any actual harms.

          • Smallletter@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Do people think socialists or communists are bothered by this term tankie? It’s like called a white person cracker. It’s not really the effect youre hoping for, I promise.

          • Marxine@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            23
            ·
            1 year ago

            “Boo hoo tankies bad, but big corpo run by billionaires who spread misinformation and intentionally act to topple legitimate governments in favor of their fascist agenda are akshually good”

            Arguing with people like you (corporate shill) is a waste of time, so I’d rather have fun instead.

          • flipht@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Real life is not speech and debate, and it isn’t an ad hominem to look at Meta’s past actions and to expect that they will continue in the same way.

            We don’t have to have a crystal ball and be able to detail exactly what will happen and when to know that this is bad news. Expecting random internet users to outthink a mega corp and send an accurate and verified copy of their plan is absurd, and it seems like a bad faith attempt at discussion.

          • icydefiance@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            38
            ·
            1 year ago

            People have articulated all kinds of actual harms, including two possibilities in the OP, but frankly they’re irrelevant.

            We know what Meta’s goals are, and we know they have absolutely no moral standards whatsoever. Exactly how they try to accomplish those goals doesn’t matter. We shouldn’t give them the opportunity to try anything.

            We should be scared of Meta, and we should keep them as far away as possible. Anything else is reckless and stupid at best.

            • masterspace@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              24
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              People have articulated all kinds of actual harms, including two possibilities in the OP, but frankly they’re irrelevant.

              No, they didn’t. The harm listed was that Meta will make a shinier platform that will syphon away users, that is happening regardless and is not a harm that is a result of federation, it’s a harm that’s a result of meta having more money to build a better platform.

              We know what Meta’s goals are, and we know they have absolutely no moral standards whatsoever. Exactly how they try to accomplish those goals doesn’t matter. We shouldn’t give them the opportunity to try anything.

              There goal is to launch a twitter competitor with a lot of users and make money off advertising. Nothing about that conflicts with the fediverse.

              Like I said, this thread is filled with a bunch of people shaking in their boots about the company who must not be named rather than actually providing sober rational assessment of what’s likely to happen.

              • jerdle_lemmy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yeah, you think they give a shit about the fediverse? They’re using ActivityPub because it’s easier for them. They’re not going to want to EEE us, because there’s not enough of us to matter to them.

                • icydefiance@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  It’s not easier for them, and once there’s enough people to matter then it’s too late to kill it. The fediverse is growing, and they want to stop that before the fediverse is big enough to matter.

              • icydefiance@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                21
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                that is happening regardless and is not a harm that is a result of federation

                Yes, it is. Read this: https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html

                There goal is to launch a twitter competitor with a lot of users and make money off advertising.

                They can do that without integrating with the fediverse. The reason they’re going to integrate with the fediverse is to embrace, extend, and extinguish.

                • masterspace@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  12
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yeah, I’ve read that, and it’s not an example of a corporation killing a decentralized network through federation, it’s just a normal example of a corporation killing a decentralized network by having more money to make a better app.

                  XMPP did not die because Google used that protocol, it died because people preferred using Google Talk over any of the XMPP apps. That would be the case regardless of whether Google used XMPP or not.

          • awderon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            17
            ·
            1 year ago

            The reactions you are seeing are based off of Metas history. We will see how it works out.

            • manitcor@lemmy.intai.tech
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              14
              ·
              1 year ago

              i have no reason to believe anything will be different going forward, the same person is in charge and they have already stated they have the same plans here that they did on thier other projects.

              why pretend its going to be “different this time”?

              • awderon@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                I didn’t mean to pretend that this will be any different. My hope is, that there will be some people who will see that there is an alternative to big tech and maybe drop Threads in favour of a real fediverse instance.

                • manitcor@lemmy.intai.tech
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  if they bomb the federation with misinfo as FB produces then its going to be interesting getting thier notice and bringing them over without turning the open network into a pit of questionable assertions. maybe airlock federations? oneway sync?

          • skillissuer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            22
            ·
            1 year ago

            i’ll take those “tankies” over completely unaccountable thiel’s buddies any day. actual tankies seem to be contained to lemmygrad where they don’t bother anyone outside of their instance

        • CyanPurple@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          31
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Gotta love the fact Meta contributed to how my country got a murderer and the son of a dictator as presidents. Real great and trustworthy company there /s

          • masterspace@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            14
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I’m not asking you to trust them, I’m asking how defederating accomplishes anything? They got more users than the entire fediverse in a single day. We are not hurting them by cutting them off, we are merely making the fediverse seem more like a barren hostile place for a bunch of weirdo nerds.

            • CyanPurple@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              25
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Defederating means not interacting with the crowd Meta brings in. I have a bunch of other reasons but that’s my main one. And before you suggest blocking, you can’t possibly expect me to block all 10M of their users and the domain block is bugged. I know because I tried.

              Besides, this place doesn’t look like much of a barren wasteland since we’re interacting with a bunch of people right now. I don’t mind interacting with only weirdo nerds if they’re nicer people. Quantity doesn’t mean quality after all.

              For the people who want to interact with Threads because of family and friends, they should just make an account there. Just don’t let Meta destroy this small part of the internet.

              • masterspace@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                14
                ·
                1 year ago

                Your argument entirely boils down to “domain blocking is still buggy”, when Threads doesn’t even support ActivityPub yet.

                Once it launches, just block their instance.

                • CyanPurple@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  10
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I was gonna type out a really neat itemized response but I don’t think you’re discussing in good faith, just like Meta and Threads. I’d rather take a nap

            • snooggums@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              30
              ·
              1 year ago

              The goal is not to hurt meta, but to keep meta from hurting the rest of the federated sites. Like not inviting a known their to the community barbecue because they are known to have stolen tons of food from other community meals. We aren’t keeping them from creating their own dinner or anything by not federating, just keeping them away from ours.

              • masterspace@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                16
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Except in this analogy, Meta hasn’t stolen food before. They run the largest bbq around, and have bought out previous corporate competitor bbqs, and now they’re hosting a giant bbq one way or another, they’re just suggesting you put a gate in the fence so that people can flow back and forth between the small community bbq and their large corporate one.

                Is that going to make you nervous since they have such a cool giant bbq that people are inevitably going to want to go there? Yeah, but again, that’s the case regardless of whether or not the gate goes in.

                • Sabata11792@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  10
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Meta is showing up to the neighborhood bbq to shoot the cook and buy the grill from the estate sale. There also going to call it supporting the grieving family.

                • snooggums@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  15
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Shilling for Meta is a bad look.

                  They steal people’s data and don’t follow data privacy laws. They draw people in with unethical business practices, not fair competition like in your example.

                  People are not worried about people using Meta outside of the fediverse. In your analogy Meta is already easily accessible through the internet in general and people can feel free to use both without needing a special gate.

            • manitcor@lemmy.intai.tech
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              26
              ·
              1 year ago

              FB is a known source for targeted misinfo campaigns. If I log into those services right now Im pretty much gaurenteed to have misinfo on my landing page.

              why federate with that?

            • Bo7a@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              13
              ·
              1 year ago

              place for a bunch of weirdo nerds.

              So we don’t get a space at all?

              -A Weirdo Nerd

      • ScaNtuRd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        104
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t see why this would hurt us. But even if it did, I would rather take the blow than associate with Big Tech again.

      • losttourist@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        How is that any different from what we have now?

        Threads has launched, but has federation disabled. So right now Threads is a standalone system, and it and the Fediverse cannot intercommunicate.

        If Threads later adds in federation but all the of the Fediverse blocks them, we’re in exactly the situation that exists right this minute. And that doesn’t seem to be hurting the Fediverse at all.

      • GregorGizeh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        71
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Growth at any cost is the mindset that not only ruins anything good for profit, it is also the exact issue we are facing now in real life with the right gaining traction in many liberal and multicultural democracies.

        Because everyone is being let in, without a second thought on if they even should be there, we now have massive social issues with not at all integrated subcultures in Europe that embrace values diametrically opposed to our tolerant and pluralist societies, in turn empowering the right to ruin any progress made in an effort to throw out the brown people again.

        The right question to ask is not “can we accept this new member to our society?”, the right question is “should we accept this new member into our society based on their beliefs and values, based on if they can contribute anything to the existing society?”

        And to return to the matter at hand, this is what the fediverse is supposed to be. A bunch of communities and little realms, each with their own rules and interests but united in their belief that self determination and democratic structures make for a better and more fair internet. And then we have the meta intruder we are about to welcome with open arms, without any rules or expectations of him to adopt our values and culture, so they bring their own, corporate, centralized culture and use their money to brute force that culture into every place of importance.

        It is not racist or intolerant of societies to expect newcomers to assimilate, and ignoring that fact brought us a re emerging right.

        And it is not fearmongering or small minded to be extremely sceptical of Facebook trying to establish themselves in the fediverse, they are literally the OG data and privacy violating corporation, they invented echo chambers and connecting extremists. There is zero value to the fediverse in welcoming meta. The only one who wins if that happens is meta.

        • Nobody@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          33
          ·
          1 year ago

          Exactly. Facebook is a known bad actor. There is absolutely no reason to believe their intentions are anything but evil. Pretending Threads is just another instance is both naive and dangerous. It is a cancer. If allowed to federate, it will metastacize.

          • masterspace@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Facebook is not evil, advertising is.

            The people at Facebook aren’t sitting there plotting to make the world worse, they’re just sitting there figuring out how to make the numbers go up and since they’re an advertising driven business, that means engagement metrics, which leads to the vast majority of their resultant evil. The advertising / engagement driven business model is what is actually evil and what could actually be addressed by legislators.

  • manitcor@lemmy.intai.tech
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    tbh, as a small instance, i might be defederating meta. im not a fan of the person that has everything through theft and scam.

  • michikade@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    They’ll probably get mad that people can take their ball and go home by going to another instance without ads and signing away access to all of their personal data but get the same content. If they defederate, to me that’s the trash taking itself out.

  • Flax@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    If you don’t federate with them, people will simply just go there instead of here because a larger user base.

    • peppy@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      i honestly prefer that. People can use two services and the fediverse won’t centralize. Win-Win. Don’t you think?

      • Kichae@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The common pattern when onboarding into the Fediverse is:

        1. “I just left [poorly moderated place with too many people] because of [reason only tangentially relates to the denizens]”.

        2. “This place is a breath of fresh air! It feels like [the Internet at some previous reference time for the user that predated them being in spaces with too many people].”

        3. “Everyone should experience this! We need to get [the people who made the previous location a hell hole] here!”

        • Flax@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t care about the culture of this place. I just want everyone using decentralised platforms so we have more choice. You cannot live without certain platforms like Facebook because everyone you know uses it. If Facebook was on the fediverse you wouldn’t have that problem.

      • masterspace@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        The fediverse not dying has yet to be proven.

        Everyone on here keeps acting like they’re in a position of power and the fediverse is destined for success, but here’s the thing, it still sucks compared to the content that’s on Reddit and FB/IG, because there’s still a tiny fraction the number of users. The fediverse is only going to be the great place to have a conversation about stuff if people use it, and everyone rushing to cut off a massive source of funding / users / content while the fediverse is still trying to compete against Reddit et al seems like a huge mistake.

        • awderon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah there is more content on Reddit or FB/IG, but that doesn’t mean, that the content there is useful to users in the fediverse.

        • Sarsaparilla@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think a great many users came to the Fediverse because they were not happy with their experience on FB, Reddit et al and were looking for something that is not that. Why should those users then be expected to recreate that model, or allow that content into this community? People here have already left those massive communities, and connections, and you speak like they lament that choice.

          • Flax@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I just don’t like being tracked, unwelcome UI changes, censorship, etc. The content on Instagram and Reddit are fine.

        • peppy@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          The fediverse will grow on it’s features and focus on transparency.

          Growth by corporate funding, users and funding will make the entire thing centralized and it dies anyway.

          Nobody will use lemmy.world if the “Threads app does the same thing but faster”.

          Majority of the people unfortunately don’t care about privacy and transparency.

          • Flax@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            But at least we could interact with threads users from the safety of mastodon

  • Monkey With A Shell@lemmy.socdojo.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Meta or any other big player that looks to ride on the fediverse space ultimately gets nothing that’s not already available publicly, and can’t push their ads or data-scraping apps on the users of the fedi. In effect they’ll either play nice and maybe a few people interact between them, or they don’t and things continue as they are today. There have been a couple posts out there of the history with Google/XMPP and now the statement by Mastodon. Private hosting of open protocols has always been a threat to the big players. In the end with the Google affair, XMPP still exists, I used to use it for my household chat, but found other options like RocketChat and now NextCloud Talk more to my taste and easier to maintain. Meta can’t kill the ActivityPub system, only the users walking away from it can do that, or, I guess ISPs if they did some sort of shady blocking en-masse but that’s another matter all together.

    I have no use for Meta in any of their forms, and would certainly push others to use the OG version of things that doesn’t scrape all their data to sell them the latest bullshit they don’t need, but there’s little reason to fear them either.

  • substill@vlemmy.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Honestly, I don’t see how this is a threat to “small” instances. Why would Meta target defederation with some dude’s 5 user instance that barely registers on anyone’s radar?

    • redcalcium@c.calciumlabs.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      If we were to take parallel with how big email providers handle federation, there is a good chance that meta will make it a lot harder for smaller instances to federate in the name of combating spam later down the line (throttling activitypub traffics, requiring certain nonstandard antispam technological measures to be added in their instance, etc).

      Whether or not the intention is malicious, it’ll effectively discourage people to “spread out” and run their own instances for their community, and fediverse citizens will slowly but surely migrate to the big operators because of less hassle and that’s where everyone hang out.

      • substill@vlemmy.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean, isn’t that good? Small instances thrive because they run faster without the overload of a bunch of users. I don’t want every asshole from Instagram on the instance I’m on.

    • peppy@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago
      1. When smaller instances thrive and attract a dedicated user base, they can challenge the dominance of larger platforms like Meta. This poses a threat to Meta’s business model, which relies on maintaining a large user base and monetizing user data and engagement.

      2. Elon suspended accounts of Journalists. Do you not see that the lizard king can do the same with small instances. And this will happen silently and the users on Threads will be unaware.

      • substill@vlemmy.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why would Meta target small instances, though, instead of larger, more popular ones? And how does it matter if Meta blocks small instances or if small instances block Meta? The result is the same.

    • marmar04@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The moment that you/a person on your instance engage with threads, it’ll likely use up your storage quota at an unprecedented rate.

      • norapink@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re not gonna be downloading the entirety of threads when you interact with them. I don’t see how interacting with threads would fill up your storage any faster than interacting with another instance.

  • Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    I really don’t understand this logic… There is literally absolute no advantage by not federating with Meta.

    Why would users prefer the free Fediverse MORE if it’s not federated with the “big and good” Metaverse? If anything it just drives them away into Metas arms, because the non-Meta instances are small and all the stuff is on Meta anyway.

    Defederating is just the worst case result, but instantly from the beginning… How does that do any good???

      • Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Both those things literally happen with 100% certainty and instantly when you defederate…

        Meta is not going to go away or fail somehow just because everyone defederates from them!

        • arquebus_x@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Most people in this thread have a vastly overestimated opinion of how large the fediverse is, how relevant it is to social media overall, and how much any other social media company actually cares about what’s going on here. If every server defederates from Meta, Meta will just shrug and go on with its day, and continue siphoning users off anyway. Probably even faster than before, because there will be no way for fediverse users to see the Threads stuff they want to see. They’ll have to explicitly re-home over there. And what are the chances they’ll stick around on the fediverse after that?

  • ExpensiveConstant@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    And the effects will be

    While the effects you list don’t seem entirely implausible, you’re stating these hypothetical situations as if they are already fact and we have evidence to indicate that. I agree with @substill in that I don’t see Threads being a threat to small communities.

  • eee@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    I get all the hate for meta and zuck, and I agree that they would only do so for their own commercial benefit, but I don’t think we should defederate without seeing what federating means. Everyone here is instinctively panicking and running around like headless chickens without seeing what it would actually entail.

    Threads is like mastodon. If federating with threads only means that threads users can participate in lemmy, I see that as an advantage for us.

    If we were a mastodon instance, this conversation would be very different.

  • gillrmn@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    1 year ago

    People forget. They go for convenience. That is how we ended up in our present state. Facebook led efforts against net neutrality too in some countries. But how many know/remember that? Amongst all other things they did.