Yup, here is the post on YSK: https://lemmy.world/post/571039

It would be unreasonable and foolish to expect or try for 100% adoption. We're talking about humans, after all. We can defederate the fuck out of them though, cutting off both them and small Instances that attach to them. The Fediverse can then sort itself into the Zuck people and the independents.

Best possible scenario for us. All future tech giants that come into the space will simply attach to the larger Zuck version, which he will certainly come to dominate the development of. We just keep on chuggin, as a competitor.

We have to be vehemently, passionately and 100% uncompromisingly anti-Meta to get this to work though, otherwise we won't pull enough of the population.

Battle lines, folks, battle lines. This is internet war. We have someone worse than Hitler, for the time being. A personal foe that threatens us by his very proximity.

All we can do, however futile, is spread the word.

Ahem, there seems to be some points that are glossed over:

Will Meta try to fuck over the Fediverse?

Yes, asap. The zuck wants "the metaberse" to be a thing.

Is it mutually beneficial to be federated?

No, they will ddos us now, and defederate later after obtaining the "power users". Google did similar when the more versatile xmpp account was xmpp-compatible-Google-talk that was pushing features and using the xmpp early adopter community as a free q&a while attracting all new users.

One of your assumptions is that lemmy admins are chasing user count. Some instances are chasing user quality. "Getting users while you can" is a good example of this assumption. A approach on forums (lemmy seems like a forum to me) is A community only chases users until critical mass is reached. Then it doesn't matter as the community can maintain content production and quality easily.

You say just "make a Better experience". Making one via open source developers or a team of paid Facebook developers will have vastly different production speeds. The problem being laid at the mastodon open source developers of "just be better" is a fools errand, and Google did a similar tactic of introducing features that were inherently buggy on xmpp only servers. I can only imagine how Facebook will do it so that there is no extra time to do anything other than debug the Facebook users experience. If we remain separate, we can be distinct and not "used". And grow in a manner that doesn't burn out.

No. Meta is shit. End of story.

It would still be up to the admins/devs to introduce those features to their respective instances. There is nothing preventing the integration of innovative features whilst still keeping the instances entirely separate.

While I appreciate the positivity, we also have to remember that federated networks are in part a direct rebuke of corporate-owned social media in general. They have a lot of reason to try and weasel in for profit -- and such weaseling is directly antithetical to the reason all of this exists. So in my view, there is good reason not to blindly accept the Trojan Horse of Meta in this situation.

An improvement under Foss won't happen. It is all closed source for them. At most it will be "buggy implementations trying to follow what the majority of users are using under zuck" and then we will be doing nothing but free q&a for zuck

I’m also not exactly seeing what the fuss is about. It might end up being a net positive for everyone. It also might end up being shitty, in which case the Fediverse and that Thread thing will probably divorce one way or another, probably by defederation of each other, but neither would die. Doesn’t seem like there’s much downside.