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

    If all instances defederate it will force people to hand their data over to Zuckerberg to access the bigger network, and they will have no control over what shite the algorithm pushes into their timeline.

    There’s a very good case for some instances to defederate. All of them defederating would be a terrible mistake.

    • 00@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      There is no strategical alliance to be made with Meta. That company literally complicitly hosted the platform for a genovide to be planned.. There is no outsmarting, strategic federating or any sudden interest on their side involved. Its all a plot to wring people out in the most heinous way they can get away with.

      What exactly would any fediverse user be getting out of this? Why would Meta have any interest in giving us anything, even attention?

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

        You’re not addressing anything I said.

        Do I have to write “Meta is evil” as a preface to every comment?

        Meta does not need the Fediverse. In terms of user numbers, we’re a rounding error. It has no need to embrace in order to extinguish. Pootling about on your high horse demanding the Fediverse become a monolith (FFS) will do absolutely nothing to stop them.

        If the Fediverse universally defederates it will force millions of users who want/need a larger network to hand their data over to Meta and the Fediverse will die for everyone who wasn’t on it before October 2022.

        There are no good choices here. But there are some absolutely daft ones.

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

          You’re not addressing anything I said.

          I was trying to say that you arent being creative enough in imagining the awful plans they might have for federation. There is no winning with Meta. The best move is not to play.

          Meta does not need the Fediverse. In terms of user numbers, we’re a rounding error. It has no need to embrace in order to extinguish.

          Companies arent actually that rational in this regard. I completely agree that the fediverse is not a threat in any possible meaning of that word, but that doesnt mean Meta wouldnt like to have its feelers on us or destroy the protocol.

          If the Fediverse universally defederates it will force millions of users who want/need a larger network to hand their data over to Meta and the Fediverse will die for everyone who wasn’t on it before October 2022.

          Defederation just means that Threads is blocked from viewing/interacting with fediverse servers. Right now, Threads is deferated (because it cant interact), but simply because they havent set it up yet. People can still learn about the fediverse and join up whenever they want. I dont think I understand your point.

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

            Defederation just means that Threads is blocked from viewing/interacting with fediverse servers. Right now, Threads is deferated (because it cant interact), but simply because they havent set it up yet. People can still learn about the fediverse and join up whenever they want. I dont think I understand your point.

            My point is that the Fediverse is growing because of exiles from Twitter and Reddit. The vast majority of those users want/need a bigger network than is currently available on the Fediverse to get the breadth and depth of content that was on those sites.

            If all instances defederate, then many of those users will reluctantly hand their data over to Zuckerberg instead. The vast majority of them already have through Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp etc.

            Meta might well want to murder us but universal defederation is just committing suicide instead. It’s the wrong tactic.

            My hope is that Threads sticks with a shitty algorithmic feed and bombards people with corporate bullshit, and its users find out that independent instances exist and will give them more control.

            My other hope is that other mega-corps (Google, Mozilla, etc) open up their own instances and end up holding each other hostage because it’s so easy for their users to jump ship to a competitor.

            It’s a difficult situation to be sure but universal defederation is giving up without a fight.

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

              The vast majority of those users want/need a bigger network than is currently available on the Fediverse to get the breadth and depth of content that was on those sites.

              Disclaimer, i havent used Threads. But everything i’ve seen from it was just influencer spam, grifting and corporate twitter. I dont think i want that kind of content. Quite the opposite, this is the reason i chose the fediverse.

              My hope is that Threads sticks with a shitty algorithmic feed and bombards people with corporate bullshit, and its users find out that independent instances exist and will give them more control.

              Why would anyone sign up for those instances if they can just look at that stuff from Threads? Furthermore, it would actually make things more difficult, because explaining the fediverse to people that are coming from a corporate social media but that have already had fediverse content is just going to turn them away. It would be far more comfortable for them to just continue using threads.
              Thirdly, it would also influence the federated instances. All the influencer spam and brand bs thats going on over there would also end up on the fediverse.
              And lastly, we dont have to win over every user and every bit of content. The fediverse isnt some VC funded social media that requires unlimited growth. If there is nothing good to grow into, it can just stay the size it is and be fine. I dont get the constant arguments for growth if the new content would be the worst social media can offer and the users would be facebook tier grifters.

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

                I dont think i want that kind of content. Quite the opposite, this is the reason i chose the fediverse.

                That’s your personal preference. What you call spam others may call content. I expect if your favorite personality / organization / news-provider joined Threads and started posting content there that you don’t consider “spam” then it being in Threads would be an annoyance.

                I believe kbin doesn’t have it yet, but some fediverse platforms offer the option to block a particular instance from your feed without limiting everyone else. So that would be an alternative. Even if by default it added Threads in the blocklist of everyone.

                I expect you do see some value on federation (seeing how you seem to be participating in some communities beyond your home instance), so I think the question “why would anyone sign up if they can just use Threads” would answer itself if you don’t assume everyone shares your preference.

                And it’s perfectly fine if those people turned away by the fediverse don’t join. Personally, I don’t think we should be trying to get everyone to join at all costs or anything like that.

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

                  I simply dont see how the fediverse would gain from this. The core of my argument remains that Meta doesnt do things “just because” or because they are “interested” in activitypub. There is no altruism behind this, far from it. And when Meta gains, we loose.

                  What you call spam others may call content.

                  Im not stopping anyone from using whatever social media they want, I simply dont want my social media filled with influencer spam, brand social media and grifting. And no, this is not hypocritical, because this:

                  I believe kbin doesn’t have it yet, but some fediverse platforms offer the option to block a particular instance from your feed without limiting everyone else.

                  Is simply a pipe dream. Sure, Twitter allows you to only interact with people you want to on a superficial level, but in reality every bigger tweet you look at will be filled with blue checkmark people selling NFT boner pills or something. And no, blocking an instance wont fix the problem, only make it slightly better. Grifters arent known for respecting the “do not talk to me about unsolicited ads” and other fediverse servers will just become a new grifting target until all you do is block people.

                  I think the question “why would anyone sign up if they can just use Threads” would answer itself if you don’t assume everyone shares your preference.

                  I made the choice to learn about federation. This isnt me being elitist, federated social media simply is harder to understand. But a lot of people have no interest or time to learn about it, which is completely fine. So obviously they are going to stay at the centralized social media platform where content is served through a laser focus target tested algorithm, which i cant blame them for.

                  Honestly, Meta never has good intentions so i dont really see a reason to defend my position. If you want to convince me about why we should federate with Meta, make some good arguments.