I think it’s pretty safe to say that the majority of us are here to avoid another corporate takeover of our preferred platforms. It would seem to me to be a tad irresponsible to allow Facebook into our space with open arms, allowing them to hoover up our data. I would love to keep using Lemmy.world, but will happily change instances if need be, and I feel many share that sentiment.
You must log in or register to comment.
Well, right now Meta is pushing, not pulling. Meaning, Threads content can be displayed on Masto, but not the other way around.
IMHO, the bigger threat is having Threads content completely dominate other activity pub clients. Other clients / communities could get dependent on it. The meta is basically a drug dealer with leverage.
Data collection doesn’t bother me too much. I’m not going to install their client and all of the behavior trackers that come with it, and my activity pub content is already freely available to query on the internet. If they want it, they already have access to it. Everyone does.
Since lemmy can’t pull from mastodon/threads, it seems like a complete non issue for now.
Lemmy pull from mastodon if someone from mastodon mentions a user or community of lemmy instance
Data collection doesn’t bother me too much. I’m not going to install their client and all of the behavior trackers that come with it, and my activity pub content is already freely available to query on the internet. If they want it, they already have access to it. Everyone does.
I will be able to follow and see friends’ posts and sports teams’ posts through Mastodon without needing a Meta account nor install their shitty apps.
All I posted via fediverse is public already, traveling into some obscure instances, so I don’t care if Meta uses or shares my public posts.
Honestly I like the ActivityPub idea. If ActivityPub becomes mainstream I am fleeing mainstream social media.
Or you could just create your own locked down, nerdy circlejerk instance for people like you.
That’s my plan 😂
;)
This article is so misleading. XMPP died for the same reason all technology dies. No one used it. Even if Google hadn’t ever used it, it would still be dead. I know this because Google Talk and ALL Google chat apps are dead. WhatsApp killed them all.
In other words, Threads could help spreading the ActivityPub protocol more, not the other way around
You are more correct than they are but are still wrong*. A lot of the interest in XMPP died after they started pursuing standardization and of course after Google close off their servers. It never had a ground swell before or after that either though. XMPP however, still exists to this day. And has become integrated into internet of things, protocols for communications between devices and as well as more comprehensive communication services such as SIP. They literally just had their 2023 Google summer of code complete a month or so ago?
But yeah XMPP is not dead. Unfortunately, it was a surpassed by a number of other services that offered more. Evolving faster than XMPP could while looking to become standardized. It only lost relevance to most. Not it’s life. For what it’s worth since 2000 or 2001, there’s hardly been a day that I have not been logged in to an XMPP server. I’m logged into one right now.
God why are all crying about XMPP? If you want to make it more popular just start using it yourself. If you don’t have anyone to speak with over there just speak with me (seriously DM me).
Also we have a lot of open source alternatives by now so XMPP is just one of many good options which means that the people will go whith what they feel comfortable with. Trust me, if XMPP would be the only decentralized, open source chat protocol around I’d be using it exclusively and many others would probably too.
I think xmpp is just the example of what could happen to the fediverse if Facebook follow the same play
So you’re saying Facebook will lose interest in the feddiverse and leave it largely unscathed to go on to do what it has always done? Not sure why people are so doom and gloom about this. This seems like the best outcome you all would want.
No, I think the point of the article is that they might try to siphon off all the casual fediverse uses with flashy features and big names and then break compatibility
There’s barely anyone to siphon right now.
Damn, if only there were examples written down somewhere, perhaps online, where we could read theories based on past events about this potential situation.
Oh well i guess 🤷♂️
even if they are only “pushing”, there will still need to be profile data exchanged with Threads in order to access it, if they have http signatures enabled (i.e. authorized fetch under mastodon)
This is what happened with Google and XMPP
They’d hoover up your data regardless lmao. Anything you post here is fair game. It’s not the same as Instagram measuring how much you look at a post or your location.
I was surprised to see lemmy.world didn’t defederate. I hope it does. And, I hope a mod weighs in on the planned direction for the instance.
They weighed in months ago back when it was announced and said they were taking a wait and see approach, where if it did cause problems they would defederate, but didn’t want to preemptively do so. Many other instances did defederate already though.
The Facebook hatred is understandable and justified, but defederating with Threads is a misguided idea:
- Federation is not required for them to be able to pull the data. Even if you block an instance, they can still pull whatever they want.
- By closing down with Threads, you’ll be basically guaranteeing that that all the millions of people that are there will never be able to migrate away.
- By getting major (current) instances to defederate with Threads, it gets easier for Threads to just say “hey, we tried to be open but they still rejected us, so we are just going to go back to our walled garden.”
Buddy i am here to avoid the lizardman and dont want him anywhere near me. Free software always has been an alternative to corprates and never a replacement. In the name of evangalic fediverse we should not give up our freedom. And above all this whill become like the trade agreement between Hati and the US.
As far as free software goes, how does running free software on your own server that you allow others to communicate with using established standard protocols violate your freedom? Not saying you shouldn’t be able to be selective about federation, but why would Facebook specifically being one of the peers violate your freedom?
I know that facebook will not rip you off your freedom just as windows wont stop you from removing or uing your computer. None the the less they will have significamt impact on the fediverse for good or bad and their influence might affect in someway we cannot predict.
deleted by creator
I mean, the last point is weird. They’d never say that, and do not care about the illusion of being open.
Point 1 is true.
Point 2, what makes you think federation will make millions of users want to move away, or even know folk are on another service. They’ll probably censor the word lemmy and every lemmy address to avoid folk advertising away. The fediverse will just be filled with nonsense data and they’ll pull the stuff that helps their platforms and keeps people hooked on the teet. Without that data, they may not be at critical mass to sustain Threads and it might eventually die. With that and Twitter going to pot, avoiding federation actually helps Mastodon as it provides a distinguishable separate entity that has reached critical mass and has significant good will with the user base that motivates them to keep sharing content.
yes, very misguided. I always loved the idea of browsing “All” and see all top brands with millions of engagement promoting their products
I thought users could block instances now?
Users can now block instances. Similar to community blocks, it means that any posts from communities which are hosted on that instance are hidden. However the block doesn’t affect users from the blocked instance, their posts and comments can still be seen normally in other communities.
So yes but not exactly. It’s not as effective as you would think that an instance block would be if it doesn’t block the users. That’s not even addressing the fact that Lemmy’s blocking isn’t even really blocking it’s more along the lines of muting, it’s just named blocking.
AP does not allow for the pushing of ads.
that’s irrelevant. Nothing prevents the influencers to promote their products as they do in all the popular platforms. You’re thinking only in terms of ads as coming from an ad server but this is not necessarily the case.
that’s irrelevant
You’re complaining about ads that are being pushed on you by an algorithm from ad companies. I’m telling you there are no ad companies. Seems relevant.
Nothing prevents the influencers to promote their products as they do in all the popular platforms.
Nothing prevents them from doing that right now.
You’re complaining about ads that are being pushed on you by an algorithm from ad companies. I’m telling you there are no ad companies. Seems relevant.
I never typed the word “ad”. I specifically said post of top brands. How can this be achieved in ActivityPub? Easy. When you are using lets say Threads, their proprietary system treats differently ads and normal posts. However, anything their system is pushing on the federated network (ActivityPub) is disguised as a normal post. A post that is having millions of engagement will be visible in “All”.
Nothing prevents them from doing that right now.
You act like you’re new to internet. What prevents them is that their audience is not here and companies are not paying them for that. However companies will pay them to promote their products in Threads. With the current numbers, Threads has the potential to dominate the “All” page.
deleted by creator
They’ll try to dominate the way the protocols evolve. Try to push more and more crap into it because they’re too big to ignore. Insert becoming ad, bot, corporate friendlier stuff. Fediverse doesn’t need meta. It’s nice and cosy and rather friendly here, I’ld like it to stay that way. It’s like Google dominates some “open source” and pushes browsers towards more and more DRM friendly etc. We don’t need that.
It’s nice and cosy and rather friendly here
And absolutely irrelevant in terms of impact. We have at best a few hundred MAU on a good month. Facebook/Google/TikTok are controlling billions of people.
If we truly believe in the superiority of the Fediverse and that it is possible to have an alternative social media for everyone, we need to go and fight Big Tech. Defederating on the grounds of “I like it the way it is” is coward, selfish and completely lacking ambition.
we need to go and fight Big Tech.
Fight them by…doing exactly what they want?
Do they want us to let them federate so that their users can use Threads as a stepping stone out of the walled gardens?
Why would that happen?
People who used Google Talk didn’t use it as a stepping stone to XMPP. They stayed on Google Talk.
Google was not charging people to talk on their network, and they didn’t make it harder to reach someone once they got it. So there was no reason for people to jump out. Facebook, on the other hand…
When the internet was in its infancy, companies and small businesses first established their online presence by getting a aol.com or hotmail.com. Running your own email or website was still expensive and not something easy to do. Today, having “your own” social media and being in control of your brand is almost as easy as having your website and your domain. I am not saying that everyone will jump out of Threads, but if Threads ever gets successful enough to replace Twitter and if we don’t shut them out of the Fediverse before it happens, at least there will be an opportunity for small businesses/media orgs/influencers that want to keep reaching their audiences (like they do today on Twitter/Facebook/Youtube/etc) and also want to take control of their own presence.
That’s not dependent on federating at all. Meta is a member of W3C, they can be a part of developing and evolving ActivityPub at any point without actively running a service with it.
Doesn’t defederating just mean they can see our content but won’t see theirs? At least it was like this few months before. Now if this is true we would lock ourselves out of the discussion while they could still do anything they wan’t with our content.
am get off old place without federation
when were you supposed to be responsible for others independent actions
That’s the thing: actions from other users and from the key players are not “independent”. It is a social network, actions and reactions depend on the context and the relationships of everyone involved.
Seems like everyone who is “for” letting threads stay can be summed up by “why would I want to intentionally separate this from a corporate entity when they’ll just get my data anyway” Like that’s a fucking valid argument.
Oppose corpos at all fronts, it doesn’t matter if they’ll get you anyway. If that’s your take, then if your country ever gets invaded, I expect you to bend over and invite the enemy inside.
Lol People are fucking idiots and these are the same people who complain about how everything is getting expensive when corporations are posting massive profits.
Not of course that that has anything to do with this topic
Well said
Well yes, if you want to be disingenuous and not actually understand their argument.
Like that’s a fucking valid argument.
It’s not. Which is why it’s so ridiculous that OP is making it.
I don’t understand. Facebook can get data from an open system whenever they feel like it.
Fetch authorization may be able to prevent that.
I’m actually really trying to play devils advocate… But I’m struggling.
I came to get away from the main stream socials.
I came to minimise my farmed data footprint.
I came to find other like minded people.
These principals alone are shared by quite a few I guess.
If we end up hooked up to the machine we were trying to escape from then coming here was near pointless.
I’m not joking when I say our only sure way of escaping the machine is to get an off-grid cabin in the woods and no longer participate in the internet.
I think you’re not seeing the bigger picture: Give up and leave will have exactly one effect. Less people stand against the “machine” and the “woods” gets more and more cabins until the machine get wind of it and comes there too.
The only solution is to fight it and kill it.
At this point I’m limiting what I access and where. I’m targeting a more 1990’s internet experience. I love learning and technical stuff and would miss it if I went off grid, no matter how tempting that is.
I came to get away from the main stream socials.
You still can. Just block threads.net instance in things like Mastodon and Lemmy.
I came to minimise my farmed data footprint.
Your data is public in fediverse. They can scrape even right as we speak.
I would need someone to confirm this, but I have heard that if you block, then it prevents their instance from scraping your data because they shouldn’t receive your content if they are blocked, but it doesn’t change the public data being available by other means anyways.
I came to find other like minded people.
Follow hashtags and communities that are your interest. Block users and/or instances you would rather not see or be part of. Also, you can find an instance that fits your values that is already blocking instances you disagree with.
I am mostly indifferent of Threads joining at this time, but those that are not in favor, there are options.
I came to get away from the main stream socials.
You came to the wrong place. This was always the goal.
Whichever way instances decide to go there’s a few things people should remember:
- We’re lucky to have this option even if it’s divisive at times.
- It’s not always about what we know will happen, sometimes it’s concern over possibilities we couldn’t even imagine at the time.
- Growth is great but there’s infrastructure, moderators and policies that can be overwhelmed.
- Defederation can be reversed at any time if things change.
Federation can also be reverted at any times if they misbehave. Why should we block them in advance?
Track record.
Historical precedent and #2/#3 on my list above make the case for erring on the side of caution. That and we’ve got far more to lose than to gain.
The amount of Meta bootlickers in this thread is incredible.
Noe consider how the number will increase AFTER they start federating!
Someone who disagrees with you is not a bootlicker.
Meta is a garbage company. Meta has done terrible things historically. At the moment we don’t know how Threads will affect the rest of the Fediverse. I’m ok with giving Meta a short leash. If you disagree, join an instance that has already blocked them. That’s how this works.
I fully expect, once rolled out, I’ll block Threads, but that is MY choice to make.
Meta doesnt need a short leash, it needs put down.
if you disagree go to threads
I’m not part of the fediverse to still have to maintain 20 accounts. In the end I want one account, ideally from somewhere like Mastodon, to rule them all. And your circlejerk throws a wrench into it for absolutely no reason other than aluminum foil bullshit.
If that’s what you were hoping for you should join Nostr, there they don’t have defederation.
Here though we do, and we use it because that’s the whole point of it, to block servers that are harmful or push unsavory content. Those who block servers are not opinionated snowflakes who have invalid opinions either.
Look the thing is that the user freedom aspect of the fediverse is not that you’re in full control of your account, or that you’re able to have unrestricted access to federation, it’s that there’s more than one place to sign up at. It’s not like Reddit where when you get banned it’s game over unless you want to spend time messing with Tor and setting up brand new emails to make a new account. There are other servers where you can sign up to if your current server bans you or defederates the instance where your communities are on.
The thing is the federation aspect is grossly misunderstood and was misrepresented in the beginning to get people to join. It is not an open and unrestricted Network, that means that there are instances that will not be up to the standards of others, for those instances they get defederated. If you still want to interact with them you need an account on them that’s just the way it is and the way it always has been, and it isn’t going to change anytime soon. The sooner you make peace with that the better your time will be here, and if you can’t make peace with it or you hate it I would suggest moving to a more open protocol like Nostr, and getting situated there.
These open protocols do have their own drawbacks, though if having one account and never having to worry about defederation is so important you I would definitely suggest looking into that, fediverse and ActivityPub might just not be for you.
Threads is part of the Fediverse now. Literally all it would be is joining an instance that you agree with.
i want everything in one place because convenience and only convenience
People don’t get that with money they can do whatever they want. Want to do something illegal, just do it because you have unlimited funds to pay your legal team to clean up the mess afterwards. We are absolutely powerless against something that can litigate you to death. Defederating is the only power we have. There is no way to react to anything that happens. There are no consequences for their actions. They don’t even answer to any governments.
allowing them to hoover up our data
Hate to break it to you, but the fediverse is public. Most instances don’t even require an account for read-only access. If Facebook wants your data they don’t need to federate to get it.
And realistically, there’s nothing stopping them from setting up a bunch of nondescript shell instances to gather data anyway.
Don’t even need that. Fifteen minutes To set up your own instance. The entirety of Lemmy still fits on a decent thumb drive.
Unless threads implements the full activitypub spec then everyone should be defederated from meta. There is a fine line for meta to walk to not harm the fediverse. Lemmy World is one of the few instances that can handle it. But meta should not be allowed to be a guiding voice in the direction of the fediverse at all
Given that we’ve watched communities like Reddit become more closed, I would rather Lemmy not do the same. The best thing an instance can do is keep them on a very tight leash, and kick out at the first sign of a rule being broken.
What Lemmy needs, above anything, is engagement. Be open to the users from Threads, instead of punishing them because you hate Meta. Many people joined Lemmy because the idea of the fediverse meant freedom to choose, and while instances are free to allow/deny who they want, it shouldn’t be a detriment to users that want to experience Lemmy.
That’s not how EEE works at all. Facebook will embrace Lemmy, extend/improve Lemmy, and then extinguish/disadvantage the native Lemmy community, until the Lemmy server serves so little of a purpose it is shut down.
How? The unhinged ranting that threads will federate with mastodon, not Lemmy. And the frothy incoherent rage that Lemmy needs to defederate from something that doesn’t currently exist and will not impact them significantly in any way once they do exist. Makes me think none of you have actually thought this through in a rational manner.
Ahmm, lemmy.world is already federated with mastodon as well, fediverse is one network of federated instances, it is not one for mastodon and another for lemmy. You can interact with mastodon post already from here
Yes. And you’d struggle to find where someone did that. It’s so awkward and uncommon it’s truly a non issue.
Except that Threads is not going to engage mutually so this argument is moot. If we federate with Threads but they do not federate with us, what exactly to we have to gain from this besides Meta’s rage algorithms?
Great how everyone saw one post from Mosseri a week ago and decided to just ignore all following posts. The one-sided federation atm is TEMPORARY. They will fully federate in the upcoming months.
Then we shouldn’t even be considering our federation until they are willing to properly join the community.
Defederating Threads doesn’t make us a closed community. All that’s going to happen is we’ll basically end up on Threads without actually being on Threads. People will either migrate there or to an instance that doesn’t have Meta/Facebook everywhere.
lemmy isnt for profit company
Theyre free to join an instance that isn’t owned by meta
Same. Defederate - or rate limit - them if the load should become an issue.
Why does it seem like everyone with this position is unaware that data here is already available publicly?
Please expand on how you believe blocking threads improves your privacy.
My objection with federating with Threads has nothing to do with privacy or data access, it has to do with keeping the ActivityPub protocol alive. Embrace, extend, extinguish is a much more legitimate threat to the fediverse than data scraping ever will be. No, the danger is that Meta will begin to contribute to the protocol. At first, contribution by a corporate actor would seem like a fantastic boon to an open standard that we wish to see grow, that’s the embrace phase. But it would not be long before Meta began adding features that are exclusive to a Threads user - they’ll extend the protocol to better accomplish their ends. In this way, they seek to bring more and more users into their platform in order to take advantage of these exclusive features while maintaining compatibility with the larger Fediverse. The end goal is to have enough users that when they decide to break that compatibility, they will make off with the majority of the users from the open community; that’s the extinguish part.
This is a well-established strategy that large tech companies have employed with open standards in the past (see XMPP). I strongly believe it is in the Fediverse’s long term interests to remain defederated from Threads, and any other large corporate player. Better to have fewer users and grow organically than to federate with Meta; we may see a short term boost to the fediverse, but the long term risks outweigh any benefit.
That being said, the nice thing about the fediverse is that I can just leave this instance for another if I disagree with the admin’s decisions.
I feel like Google is, or has, done this with AOSP
and with the usenet
Left this in another response to previous poster, but since you summarized the points, I wanted to link the article as well: https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html
I seen a lot of people post this and they always think that the counterpoint to that would be just don’t allow them to build exclusive features into the standard. If they add a feature, fine but it has to be for everyone.
If they start adding exclusive features then the developers can block them at a API level. The open source GNU license still gives the original developers creative control over the project and they can shut down anything that is not contributing to open source standards. Is there a need for individual instances to take action unless you think that the developers won’t block Meta, and they hate meta, so they will. But right now there’s nothing for them to do because Meta haven’t actually done anything yet.
You’re making the assumption that Meta will give a single shit about the GNU license at all. Does the fediverse have the means to fight one of the largest companies on the planet in court?
They don’t need to take them to court they can just block meta if they act badly there’s no need to sue.
How does defederating mitigate EEE?
Facebook is a data harvesting company. Yes, it can scrape the data but why hand it to them on a silver platter? Let them scrape it, if they want it so bad. The issue is facebook has destroyed democracies , bought out competition and never had a good track record so why risk it. If we federate, it’ll be like smoking cigarettes even though we know smoking causes cancer.
Yeah Meta is a terrible company, I don’t actually believe anyone is arguing otherwise, but the point is that if they are defenderated all that will happen is that people who are on instances that defederate from them won’t be able to see or interact with their content. However the inverse will not be true, so the data will still be scrapable. So if your argument for defederating is that you want data privacy then you’re arguing about a moot point. You don’t get data privacy either way.
Now just to be clear here, I am not saying that defederating from them is a bad idea I’m just pointing out that the argument of privacy is moot. The only way to prevent your data being scraped by facebook would be to not use activitypub at all.
Read my comment again but this time slowly
If they’re really just after data at all costs, they could easily spin up an instance that has no apparent link to threads and federate secretly. I agree with other arguments about not federating with them but idk, all these data privacy arguments against federating with threads are so dumb. If they want it, they’ll get it because getting it is so absurdly easy.
Privacy is the less relevant point here. Keeping the fediverse alive is the central point. Just look at reddit to see how corporate greed can fuck up a social network. Or google groups killing the usenet by “federating” with it. If you want the expanded version: https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html
I’m so tired of that article.
Neither the people advocating for dedederation nor that article ever explains how defederating is going to defeat EEE.
I take it you got tired before getting through the first paragraph even the first time reading? No one is talking about “defeat EEE” - it’s about protecting yourself against attempts to use the EEE strategy. And the article explains exactly how defederating is relevant in that regard.
I read the whole thing the first time it was presented to me.
No one is talking about “defeat EEE” - it’s about protecting yourself against attempts to use the EEE strategy.
Yeah and it spouts vague platitudes while avoiding specifics. Maybe it’s the sysadmin in me but that isn’t worth shit.
How does defederating “protect against attempts to use the EEE strategy”?
Maybe I could see a valid point if you could instantly have all instances defederate now and forever but you can’t.
Since you refuse to acknowledge that the explanation is right there in the text, I’ll have to assume you have ill intent.
Honestly I dont think they are data scraping the entire internet. There is no evidence to believe they are.
I dont want to manually feed my data to them on a silver platter.
They also don’t get access to all the data that I think is most invasive (federated or not). I expect my posts, comments, votes, and follows on a public forum to be public. I don’t expect which posts I open, which comments I read, and how long I view each one for (a much larger and more invasive pool of data) to be public, and that’s what I don’t want Meta to get. By not using threads, they don’t get that. By using threads (or any Meta product) they do get that, and they probably use it to shovel more ads in your face.
While I am a little cautious of the possibility of EEE, I feel like the majority of fediverse users are anti-corporation and relatively technically informed, and would anticipate any attempts to extinguish it would be poorly received and ineffective. (Edit: although I do think this argument is reasonable and haven’t really decided whether I think federating with threads is a good idea)
Either way, federating with threads won’t give them any non-public information, which is substantially better than if you used their products directly. The other information is there for anyone to grab, so it’s kind of weird to complain about them reading it. If you put up a sign in your yard, you wouldn’t complain about people who walk by reading it.
If they want mastodon or lemmy data, they already have access. Full stop.
Downvoting facts you don’t like doesn’t change reality, unfortunately.
Because they don’t know what’s going on and are just trying to fit in.
Those people aren’t great at thinking things through. They’re “idea people”.
When it comes to Corporates it very much is like the Nazi Bar allegory: you let one Nazi stay because he’s beheaving rasonably and not being nasty, and sooner or later the place is going to be full of his friends and turned into a Nazi Bar.
It’s the same dynamic only with corporate logos, advertising, hypercommercialism and eventual enshitiffication instead of swasticas, racist messaging and violence.
Certainly in my eperience of it since the 90s, the Internet changed very much this from its early days and spirit as commercial interests from their original foothold almost entirelly subverted it to serve their interests.
If the majority of us are truly here specifically to enjoy the freedom of choice, then it would follow that peering with Facebook wouldn’t be a major risk for active users here, and possibly an opportunity to reach a less savvy audience.
Lemmy and mastodon are platforms good for connecting broadly. There could even be a separate instance that is a subsidiary division of a major player.
And as far as hoovering up our data, we’re already out here putting it out there. Don’t put sensitive data on here and don’t sign up for an instance owned by surveillance-capitalists.
They are not federating with anyone as far as I heard, so why federated with them.
I also wonder how the rest of the fediverse can do better to demonstrate its value, in terms of users and content, which would cause threads users to desire content from us.
Meta should be fully jetisoned from the entire federation. If people want threads, join threads. edit: If people want their sports and brand posts then aggregate using RSS for corporate and non-corp social media. The whole purpose of the fediverse was to be NOT linked to tech bro empires.
