I get meta evil, but aren’t we just blocking out any users from accessing the wider fediverse?

  • iorale@lemmy.fmhy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Users are free to download Threads and go lick zucc’s balls if they so desire, instances are just protecting themselves and the responsability that comes with it.

    It’s getting tired reading so many zucc apologist, I swear they are bots or accounts created for that purpose

  • Rottcodd@lemmy.ninja
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    No - they’re blocking out any users from accessing the wider fediverse through threads.

    They’re entirely welcome to access the fediverse through any of the countless instances that are not owned by grotesquely destructive megacorporations.

    • dartos@reddthat.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      If you’re in the know, sure, but if the fediverse interacts with threads we could expose literally billions of people to the larger fediverse.

      Maybe while the fediverse is still getting it’s legs defederating is the move, but I mean literally billions of people being made aware of the fediverse would be amazing.

  • stewie3128@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I think ActivityPub’s license should prohibit financially profiting from the platform.

    EDIT: I mean “should be changed to”

  • pulaskiwasright@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Facebook can bootstrap their product with federated content made by users who are in the fediverse because they don’t want to support a company like Facebook. By not defederating, you would be helping Facebook every time you post a comment or make a post because you would be giving Facebook free content to further their for-profit goals.

    Edit: they will also be taking fediverse content and displaying it next to ads.

  • Samus Crankpork@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Threads is currently in the first stage of EEE: Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. Best to stop it now before it goes too far.

    From Wikipedia:

    “Embrace, extend, and extinguish” (EEE), also known as “embrace, extend, and exterminate”, is a phrase that the U.S. Department of Justice found that was used internally by Microsoft to describe its strategy for entering product categories involving widely used standards, extending those standards with proprietary capabilities, and then using those differences in order to strongly disadvantage its competitors.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish

  • Steinsprut@szmer.info
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Couple reasons actually

    • Meta wants to scrap every bit of data, doesn’t matter if it’s on Threads or networks federated with it

    • They just want a free usercount boost for start, and will remove ActivityPub integration when they feel Threads can go on alone

    • It’s all a classic case of Embrace, Extend, Extinguish

  • Lee Duna@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    https://infosec.pub/post/400702

    and…

    YSK : Meta is a threat to the privacy of fediverse users, if there are fediverse instances that remain federated with Meta.

    Ross Schulman, senior fellow for decentralization at digital rights nonprofit the Electronic Frontier Foundation, notes that if Threads emerges as a massive player in the fediverse, there could be concerns about what he calls “social graph slurping." Meta will know who all of its users interact with and follow within Threads, and it will also be able to see who its users follow in the broader fediverse. And if Threads builds up anywhere near the reach of other Meta platforms, just this little slice of life would give the company a fairly expansive view of interactions beyond its borders.

    https://www.wired.com/story/meta-threads-privacy-decentralization/

    • dartos@reddthat.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      That infosec post up some good points.

      The issue I see is that defederating them doesn’t resolve any of the issues they pointed out. Meta is still able to see most information in the fediverse, their built in user base is so large, that it makes the fediverse look totally empty by comparison. I don’t think we realistically prevent much disinformation by walking them off (though we do prevent some)

      I just think it’s such a missed opportunity to grow the fediverse. Like now we’re 100% certain that threads users won’t take part in the larger lemmy communities at all.

      EEE is a real thing, but it’s a balance act. You can be embraced and extended without being extinguished as long as you do it carefully (I mean look at some of the open source projects of the past decade. Typescript, bucklescript, react, electron and even companies like GitHub, which M$ owns, but hasn’t been mucking up too badly)

      Maybe defederating for now is the right move, so the fediverse has time to grow into its own, but I don’t think “meta evil” is a good enough reason to just block out potentially billions of potential fediverse participants is all.

      • Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Letting them be part enables their abuse. Not let them join, protect the fediverse and let’s it grow slowly. If you focus on being big quickly, maybe you are right, but if you want to maintain and grow the fediverse for a long time… You are almost certainly wrong.

  • Dodecahedron December@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Meta evil and people I think may not understand that meta will read/mine your public fediverse activity if it wants to, regardless of federation status.

    People may not know how sites block other search engine crawlers (scrapers like google) and it may surprise them realize that all that’s done is adding a line to a text file that says “if you call yourself a xyz browser then you can’t scrape” and hope that the crawler reads and obeys that request. We arent talking about iron clad defenses here. The same goes for defederating.

    Defederating from facebook will remove the means for facebook to actually federate the way we are used to seeing on lemmy - we wont see their content, we can’t react to their content, and at least at the beginning they wont see our content.

    But if they wanted to, facebook could just consume the lemmyverse and show the top posts on facebook. The only thing that would stop them is a lawsuit. Even then, if they wanted to it would just come down to money - cost of a fine vs cost of losing facebookers to the fediverse.

    Facebook needs to only emulate the fediverse as they have emulated the rest of the internet into facebook. Hell, if they wanted to they could just show friends the content their friends consumes on the fediverse and build public forums around that content. Kind of like how facebook (and reddit, etc) work.

    Folks may want an option to completely wall-out facebook from ever observing any of their actions on the fediverse. Its a nice idea but it’s not something that defederating brings. Public internet is public to all, unfederated, including facebook.

    Of course we can request that facebook not scrape the fediverse and complain when they do, but I don’t see that as having much momentum for change.

    • Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It is not about the data. It is about the users and communities. They can copy the content but a threads user couldn’t really ask a fediverse user a question through threads. The interaction is why we are on social media. If threads is not part of the fediverse, it can’t provide the users with the same interactions. the fediverse wants users on many different smaller servers. We need to get the user to move to such a server, if we want the fediverse to work.

    • dartos@reddthat.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is what I mean.

      Meta is going to get public data one way or another. It’s not hard to scrape the fediverse normally.

      Like all defederating them does is make the fediverse more closed off, not less

      You can’t even really block scrapers without actually locking down a site. You can just ask nice bots (like googles crawler) to not index you.

  • tko@tkohhh.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Is threads Mastadon? or Lemmy? or something else? How does it interact with lemmy? And how can I block it on my server?

    • dartos@reddthat.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Honestly it doesn’t even matter. If meta really cared about fediverse data, they’d set up their own unnamed server, make a bot account that just follows and subscribes to as much as it can. Nobody would know to block it, it’d just look like another user.