Dear server admins, please defederate threads.net. Dear users, ask your server admin to defederate threads.net.
3 years ago by mypasswordis1234 to c/fediverse
Meta just announced that they are trying to integrate Threads with ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, etc.). We need to defederate them if we want to avoid them pushing their crap into fediverse.
If you're a server admin, please defederate Meta's domain "threads.net"
If you don't run your own server, please ask your server admin to defederate "threads.net".
OK, I'll bite. You got something more substantial than "I read it on the internet" to back that up? One reputable source on your accusation? Not sayin' you're lying/wrong, just asking for some verifiable proof.
Numerous actual popular accounts and news sources have been suspended. It was major news in the Arabic-speaking world in October. Meta even apologized for auto-translating Palestinian as “terrorist.”
At the moment this is coming from secondary sources from within meta so there are no articles about it that I'm aware of. But Palestinians and activists constantly have their content removed, account reach limited, and comments removed (which has happened to me multiple times). People also have their accounts threatened and removed.
These actions are visible constantly, meta have been doing this since the start. For example, when you go to someone's stories at the top it might show 4 or 5 stories, but when you click through to their profile there'll be 20+.
Some people I follow don't even show up at the top anymore and I have to access their stories via their profile page or if I've messaged them recently.
After (as of this reply) eight hours, you have produced nothing more than anecdotal evidence if not outright invented. I must assume at this point you are spreading disinformation for whatever your goals may be to that end.
Thank you for wasting everybody's time.
Well a good friend of my girlfriend is from Gaza. He has been posting translations from his sister's account of what it is actually like living there right now. Then some AI artwork behind stories of "this place was bombed, my friends just were killed, etc..." and he got a big notification on Instagram that "his account has been restricted for violent hate speech" even though he didn't incite violence even one time. He just has posts with 2nd person stories of the situation there.
What are you some conspiracy nut? /s
lemm.ee already made the decision, based off of the voice of the community to defederate from Threads
Lemmy.Ca admins blocked Threads about 5 months ago: https://lemmy.ca/comment/901551
You can confirm that Threads dot net is still blocked by Lemmy.Ca by going to https://lemmy.ca/instances and clicking on the "Blocked Instances" tab.
Thanks, I actually forgot that one can check!
lemmy.dbzer0.com also blocked Threads
please take a look at the replies under zuck's own post in threads.net and determine if that's the type of content you want.
for those who don't want to visit, majority of the commentators are bots. some advertising crypto, and others asking for money.
even if you think you can individually block those accounts, keep in mind the size of threads compared to fediverse.
for Lemmy: monthly active users are barely 150K40K, while for threads it's 100 million. there's no chance you can control that inflow of bots.
and if it still doesn't convince you, you can read threads' privacy policy, which states that they'll gather all that pii if you interact with their content.
most of the internet is already bigtech, I don't want Lemmy to become another arm of it. though I have faith in my instance maintainer and dessalines, the dev.
Comment stolen from user "copygirl" from blahaj.zone:
Looks like they'll be harvesting your data if you follow anyone from Threads, maybe even injecting ads. Unsure what happens to the data of people that get followed by a Threads user. A large part of the fediverse is here precisely because they want to escape corporate meddling, data-hoarding, advertising and other anti-user malpractices. There's a number of people talking about this, here's a recent post that highlights some of the things from their TOS.
Surely you're aware of the embrace, extend, extinguish corporate strategy.
People only get to decide what they want from their platform until facebook starts extending the spec. Then your client will become incompatible with some posts, and so on and so forth.
In summary, it's a threat to the platform itself.
Exactly, I hereby decide that I would like to ignore corporate efforts to undermine this burgeoning new platform. I furthermore reserve the right to complain about the loss of said platform in future years by claiming that it's everyone elses fault for allowing corporate encroachment.
Yeah dude let’s just federate with an instance maintained by a corporation that has undoubtedly caused a genocide in Myanmar by turning a blind eye to a far-right hate speech group that caused an entire fucking minority to flee into another country.
I don’t get why people are supporting and saying “oh it must be up to the user” like bro this is the company we’re dealing with. Fuck that fuck threads fuck zuckerberg i don’t want his shit cancer near something that’s going well so far.
Imagine thinking Myanmar is facebooks fault. Wow.
Read up rookie
I don’t know what version of reality you live in but i hope these articles are illuminating
I can't imagine why you are getting push back. I can tell you are very passionate in your position and are on the right side of a complicated issue. The only reason I can think of is your idea hasn't become mainstream yet and people hate it when they don't know they should be upset.
Either way I have no skin in it and I agree that meta is garbage. Thank you for be passionate about something in this dispassionate world.
🙄 I guess the years of violence well before hand we their fault too. Imagine trying to tie years off violence and genocide to Facebook.
It'll always be Burna to me.
That one is actually public record, with
Facebook using their influence to set up in the country in a way that made it the dominant form of internet access for the country, enough that a large number of people considered Facebook=internet
Facebook getting multiple reputable warnings about what was happening on the platform, what their advertising policies and algorithms were encouraging, and they chose to not act on them and instead continued to profit from it
They finally did act after a whole lot of harm was done
Their direct fault? No. But they sure as fuck share a lot of the blame in pouring gasoline on the fire.
Then go join threads.net? Nobody's stopping you from doing that. That would put you on a server friendly to your beliefs.
Server admins also have opinions, and are not required to take a democratic vote and each individual user's choice into account. They can decide for themselves, and they will, for good or ill. If you don't like where it ends up, your user decision should be to fuck off to threads.
"Yes, Jeffrey has, in the past, killed and eaten gay men. But we should wait and see. It's impolite not to invite him to the party!"
I don't want to use their platform, but I get why some people might choose to stay federated so that there is incentive to pull people to mastodon and educate people about the issues
There's enough nuance there that I'm not dead set on either side, and I think we still have the chance to defederate later if there's an increase in spam and harmful content / disinformation.
The above is solvable if you block them I guess, but by default it will completely ruin everything.
Yes. One minute of a user’s time and all that’s gone.
Compare that with having to move instances due to admins blocking at the instance level.
You have the full right to decide, you can switch servers to one that chooses to, or open multiple accounts. That's your choice. This isn't Nostr, in the Fediverse instance blocking is normal and it happens without your input, but you know what does happen with your input? Registering your account on a server that fits your needs best, or as close as possible.
Generally, yes. Perhaps unpopularly, I don't need to decide about suddenly having meta content in Lemmy. I expect that's not ever gonna happen.
Having Elongated Musk or Fart Suckerberg in my stream cannot be the default, but at best, opt in.
This is why I don't understand all the hysteria about this.
If I don't want to see Threads or I don't want Threads to see me, I can go to a Threads account and click "block threads.net".
But obviously that's too complicated and it's easier to just whinge to your instance admin about how Threads federation will be the death of us all. 🙄
If there was a bot that just flooded All with far right talking points, do you think admins ought to block that or leave it to the users?
What if it was far right mixed in with cat memes?
What if it started more slowly like a few posts an hour and then ramped up over 6 months to be 1000s of posts per hour?
Well, that's spam. So obviously it would make sense to block that.
Sure, but where is the line between spam and threads content? If the content a community produces is heavily manipulated, isn't that undesirable for all the same reasons as spam ?
Do you think any users would populate a place that's over-run with trash?
If there are, would they be the type of users who would populate communities you would feel comfortable in?
You understand that no matter how much you kneel down to service Meta, Zuck the Fuck won't be trickling anything down on you that isn't a bodily fluid, right?
And hey, I'm not going to kink-shame. Just pointing out that if that isn't your specific kink, you might want to wake up to there being zero dollars trickling down to you.
What a meaningless, worthless comment. Letting Threads federate with the rest of the Fediverse doesn't give Zuckerberg power over us (unless you'd care to explain how it does) - rather, it just gives its users and our users the ability to interacted. Why are you so interested in building walls?
I swear, I'm seeing the western equivalent of wumaos servicing Meta here. Only at least the wumaos got paid; it made sense. These idiots are doing the labour for free!
In favor of defederation. If I start seeing garbage from threads in my feed, I'm switching instances. I don't want Meta pushing their divisive, hateful, misinformation all up in my feeds. Meta will kill fedi. We don't need them.
If anybody remembers XMPP being widespread and what Facebook, Google, Apple and others (say, I personally remember VK and Yandex in Russia supporting it) did to it, that's what will happen if you "wait and see".
EDIT: oh, half the thread is such comments
Currently, I think there are two main branches of ActivityPub implementations: Microblogs(Mastodon and its forks, the microblog portion of kbin), which are user centric, and group based aggregators(Lemmy, Kbin, peertube, future Pixelfed), both of which are valid implementations, however, they don't really work well with each other.
So, I believe that the threat of Threads to Lemmy instances is really overblown for the simple reason that there is no way for a Lemmy user to browse microblog contents through federation to begin with, whether it be Mastodon or Threads.
Kbin actually does let you look at and browse microblogs as well as threads.
https://lemmy.world/comment/5715981
This person who responded to me didn't think so. Maybe you can talk to him about it.
Let's not defederate from every corporate player. Some of them can probably respect reasonable rules of civility.
But fuck Meta. We already know how this plays out.
We know there's a huge wave of hatred and misinformation incoming. We've seen it on their other platforms.
Okay. I’ve seen stuff like this on both mastodon, and here, but i haven’t heard about them doing anything that would actually harm the fediverse. I guess i don’t know what the problem is. I know they’ve got a negative reputation, and for good reason, but isn’t that the awesome part of threads being federated? We can follow and connect to people there without being part of their system, and therefor not susceptible to their bs? If I’m missing something please fill me in.
Are you planning to pay for the extra bandwith to deal with all the additional traffic?
Meta will.
And then when they own the servers amd all the traffic, lemmy will be quietly murdered.
Quietly, because they'll control the traffic, and therefore the narrative
All activity pub needed to do was create a user rights guidelines that prevents profiting off the data. Meta wouldn't have touched the Fediverse with the 10-foot pole, if that were the case.
Lololol and what legal mechanism are you going to use to enforce that?
ActivityPub is a protocol, not a fucking organization. It literally has no agency.
People have been writing about this ad nauseum. It's the embrace, extend, extinguish strategy. Join fediverse, extend the spec with so that not all clients are compatible with all features, repeat as necessary until everyone is using your client, finally drop compatibility with other clients.
My sweet summer child.
With a network that big, they have to be very careful, and really try, if they don't want our servers to just go kaboom.
Or we just defederate from any of those attempts.
Give https://ploum.net/... a read. Might sway you, might not.
This is an excellent point. Thanks!
in that case considering meta is saying that it would take nearly a year to federate the platform we probably should defederate them.
What point in that linked blog swayed you? The circumstances are quite different. XMPP was dogshit when Google started working with it. ActivityPub is light years ahead.
I really don’t know enough to say one way or the other, but the fact that this is an established Microsoft practice swayed me. I can actually believe google didn’t intend to do what it did to xmpp as a log of google employees from the 2000’s speak highly of the company, but these executives are traded like nfl players, and i know enough about meta’s history to believe they may do this. Besides I’m still new to development, but i don’t see many other reasons why it would take meta nearly a year to fully launch federation.
Actually this just occurred to me, but isn’t it interesting which accounts were linked first?
Just think:
Meta has literal billions of users.
The entire fediverse has about 1.5 million.
Less than a fraction of a percent.
Why in THE FUCK would meta notice, or care, at fucking all? The entire fediverse of traffic ported over to meta wouldn't budge their advertising bottom line.
But, it's a comparatively small group of smart people, having conversations, and profiles they don't have tabs and near total control over.
There's news about cop city and gaza I have seen here that I've seen NOWHERE else.
Don't let them control the narrative here
Well, then, let’s make our point I’ll just email the holders of the instances I’m on and let them know I support defederating threads
The fediverse is an emerging threat. It's not ready yet, but it's on the right trajectory. Every time there's angst on some other platform, the fediverse get's a bump. Fediverse is not a real competitor yet, perhaps it never will be, but for meta it's sensible to establish a presence here in the short term, because it may be much more difficult later.
Why in THE FUCK would meta notice, or care, at fucking all?
Why do people ask rhetorical questions without following through?!
This is a question that should be asked. If, indeed, the fediverse is so unimportant WHY THE FLYING FUCK IS META INTERESTED IN FEDERATING WITH IT!?!? THAT is the question people should be asking, given that Meta does nothing that isn't designed to add more money to Zuck the Fuck's portfolio.
And yet … most people (for clarity, I don't mean you here!) don't ask that question. They don't take that question you ask and wonder beyond that first kneejerk level. Use that question instead as a "LOL Meta doesn't care about the fediverse" piece of evidence.
And this is why we can't have nice things.
There is one big reason why they would care - antitrust and EU regulation protection. They have no intention to destroy the platform Rather they want to please the regulators as they are leveraging the open standards. The EEE strategy is a conspiracy theory. Government regulations are the most probable reason for this change.
Dude, even if it isn't straight out EEE they'll just drown us, and eventually kill us because if whatever reason. It doesn't even have anything to do with Lemmy, they have to manuver carefully if they want to let us live.
Do you have a Lemmy server that can take the load off of a billion user network? I have one and it for sure can't.
Your server has users that all follow every single user on the entire fediverse? I will admit, that'd be a real concern in that case, but it also sounds a bit weird. What kind of users do you invite to your instance? O.o
But that's good. Meta doesn't care about Lemmy or Mastodon because they're tiny. Threads is a threat to Twitter. They want to integrate with Mastodon just because Twitter doesn't. That's it.
They're not going for "total control" of your conversation about Gaza. You are not important to them. You are not the main character in some David and Goliath story. There are only Goliaths.
Do you know why Facebook paid a billion dollars for Instagram? Instagram wasn't worth that much. It wasn't generating a billion dollars in revenue. It probably still doesn't.
Facebook bought Instagram because Instagram was a growing app that was popular with a demographic Facebook wanted to control. They spent a billion dollars to eliminate a growing threat.
Mastodon and, to a lesser extent, Lemmy, represent a growing threat. Not a very big one right now, but it could become a bigger one. It could become another billion dollar problem for the goliaths on the Internet, in a few years. They need to have total control, if a social media app starts to fragment it just collapses instead as users decide to go wherever the other users are.
Facebook's 1000:1 user ratio would make Lemmy irrelevant and stave off that billion dollar problem for Facebook down the road. An incredibly cheap way to kill a tiny but growing competitor.
Facebook's 1000:1 user ratio would make Lemmy irrelevant
That’s the case whether or not you federate with Threads. But if you do, that’s not going to matter because you can freely communicate with people on Threads.
They don't want to federate because Twitter does not.
But neither to "extinguish" Mastodon or so. They need it as a defense like Google uses Mozilla, showcasing that not only do they enjoy competition, they in fact actively support it, by making their content available over there, too.
Because like you say, the entirely metaverse is so tiny compared to meta, thy could not give a flying fuck whatever the reason if it's about anything competitive. But they can utilize the tiny underdog as a shield from criticism. And that's valuable to them.
Meta will be okay making money off lemmy indirectly for a while. Then, if they grow, they'll want more than a toehold.
When it's Facebook, trust that greed and power are the goals.
People are concerned because there were examples of such things going horribly wrong, most notably with Google and XMPP.
Way back in the day, Google announced that its Talk messenger will support XMPP, which made decentralization fans very happy - finally, they can communicate with everyone from the comfort of their decentralized instance!..oh.
Google started implementing features in Talk that are incompatible with XMPP, and then dropped XMPP support altogether, ending up deprecating Talk in favor of Google-only Hangouts. This forced many XMPP users to get into Google's ecosystem, since the people they contacted through XMPP were mostly just using Google Talk, and they couldn't be contacted through XMPP any more. As a result, XMPP became worse off than it started and got practically forgotten by all but 1,5 nerds who keep it alive.
now most of their contacts were in defederated Google to which they now didn't have access.
this ☝️. Those of us who remember what happened then, understand the potential dangers of federating with a juggernaut like META.
We should tread lightly!
Xmpp's popularity isn't the point.
The point is google intentionally killed it
Not even a little bit. XMPP was rubbish.
No it's not in the least bit, but because people keep reposting that angry blog post by someone who was personally involved and wanted someone to blame so they blamed Google (as if XMPP needed any outside help to fail to catch on, they could do it on their own perfectly fine), people believe that narrative and then get sold on Meta wanting to the same with the Fediverse. As if they could give a flying fart (just like with Google and XMPP).
@Creatortray
You've just written it : their negative reputation for easaly understandable reasons. We can already foresee Threads will very soon be used to spread the most toxic campaigns on the net and that will undoubtably harm the Fediverse. One of the most valuable trait of the Fediverse is its decentralization and consequently, the potential accountability of any server administrator. Why should we take those risks when it's so easy to avoid it? #BlockThreadsOut
@mypasswordis1234
@Nelfan @Creatortray @mypasswordis1234 if my server federates with #Threads and it creates a problem, I’ll stop supporting it and move to one that doesn’t.
@boiglenoight @Nelfan @Creatortray @mypasswordis1234
Great toot, Nelfaneor, but to use the word 'risk' with respect to the probability of #falseBook creating harm in the #fediverse network, is a mistake — it is a "certainty".
Boiglenoight if you value the free and open web we have news for you, your instance is having its HTTPS intercepted by Cloud(G)lare (change 'G' to 'F'). Move to a different one, if you want us to continue dialog with you.
It'll be successful and the current devs will lose the ability to unilaterally control the project.
So competition, that's what they are afraid of.
We should avoid making blanket demands like this to the fediverse as a whole. I happen to support your position, but we should take into account the diverse nature of the social web.
Instead of making demands, explain your reasoning and leave each community to make up their own mind. This is the beautiful nature of the social web; we have broken decision making down into many smaller units instead of one mega instance/corporation.
Find a community that resonates with your own thinking on this issue, and over time a thousand different servers will gather experiences and a picture will start to form; was federation with Meta a good or a bad thing?
There's a list of people that have agreed to block it at https://fedipact.online/
Graphic design is my passion.
Meta is a threat to the platform though.
So do preemptively defederate when any corporation makes a new instance?
I've seen strong support for Tumblr federation adoption, so no. Context is important.
What exactly is "pushing their crap"? Chances are it will be more moderated and less arbitrary than what passes through from some lemmy instances. Hatred and misinformation? Harvesting your data? Like this isn't already a factor with lemmy? In the Fediverse, we have admins who flagrantly break their own TOS. Plus it seems to me this is an opportunity for lemmy to get advertisement at Threads' expense.
If you don't subscribe to threads you'll never see it.
Because threads doesn't have communities. All threads people can do it comment.
They can post to communities by mentioning their handle, mastodon users do it all the time. They're certainly not going to be as much of a problem for us since it's a deliberate process, but it's also not that far fetched that users will sign up there to abuse it, especially if threads has poor moderation (it's not looking good as it is).
Undoubtedly.
The thing you don't get is that more common people will find the lemmy servers for the first time. Additionally it is more of a Twitter clone and doesn't threaten much.
What do you mean by "find Lemmy servers?" I mean, can you describe how that will look like from the perspective of someone that is using threads? And how that will motivate more common people to change the platform or browsing behavior?
Lemmy.world is a server running lemmy software. It's federated so you can subscribe to lw communities of Mastodon and comment as well. Threads and Mastodon don't support communities though so all they can do is subscribe and comment. There is no negative to lemmy servers of Threads being federated. Threads users will subscribe to lemmy communities, but stay on Threads. If you're on a lemmy server it doesn't change anything. You'll just see posts and comments with accounts ending with @threads
I can kinda see the point, but also without providing actual reasons, this post just seems like a LARP.
Oddly, this may well be what really spurs on decentralisation. I suspect more and more individuals, or small groups, will spin up their own instances rather than all gravitating to the bigger ones, due to issues like this.
Because, ultimately, the more tech-savvy users (the ones more likely to be into the Fediverse, anyway) will want to decide for themselves what content they do and don't see.
And it's nothing to do with whether or note someone likes/trusts Meta. It's people being able to make their own decisions on what content they want to be able to follow and not have it decided by someone else based on their interests. If someone's friends/family/fandom has a heavy Threads presence, they can spin up their own instance and be able to follow that content themselves without it really affecting anyone else. (and without having to sign up to Threads themselves...)
Well, I said before I'll leave any servers that federate with Meta, and it's looking like that time.
I hate Zuck and Facebook as much as the next person, but I think the rollout is going slowly enough that we don’t need to fight about it yet.
The discussion is important and needs to be had, but it’s premature.
Everywhere this pops up, the users have decided:
Fuck meta. Fuck threads. Fuck the zuck.
Do not associate. Defederate now
That's not how federation works, which makes me worried that users who get to "vote" on this thing (they don't, it's the instance owners that do) actually do not understand what would happen.
If I understand correctly, your server will only receive posts from users that someone on your server has subscribed to, so the number is overblown by several orders of magnitude.
The best case scenario of letting Meta in is neutrality. Far more likely is then actively destroying stuff. Remember, their motto is move fast and break things
So what are they going to do?
The whole "Oh they'll microsoft it!"-narrative is clearly false already. As plenty people said the last time someone posted that sensationalist "how to kill the fediverse" (or so) blog post already, this is not about Meta trying to "kill" the fediverse. If anything, the opposite. This is them Mozilla-ing it, using it as a defense against new regulations. They can even point to instances defederating en masse as "See? We tried! They're all blocking us, so it's not our fault this cross-compatibility isn't working." and then in the future use that as a defense against further attempts to open up walled gardens. They tried, the supposedly "open" side actively blocked it, now the other side has to move before they try again.
People misunderstand the actually extremely obvious reason they're doing this. There's also an easy reason they're dragging their feet so much: They don't want to. But they have to. So they promise they'll federate, actively hope they get blocked (see above), and only actually do it last-second to avoid issues with new legislation.
your point about them trying to federate as a defense against new regulations is one i hadn't considered before. however, that doesn't reduce the potential harm of federating with threads. facebook/meta have proven at practically every possible chance that they are not to be trusted with even the most inconsequential of things and should be avoided by anyone smart enough to recognize this.
it sounds to me like you are suggesting that federating with threads will prevent them from having that out of "see? we tried", but i feel that cooperating with facebook/meta in any way is a compromise on my morals that i simply can't justify.
i'd love to hear what potential benefits you (or anyone else who wants to contribute) believe federating with threads will bring to us other than a ton of users from a different ecosystem, as the discourse around this has been pretty all over the place recently and i think we need more measured opinions on this.
Zuck has been refining his unethical business model for decades, they aren't joining activitypub to be a team player
Which I never said. Is it required to leave reading comprehension at the door when joining discussions about Meta? Because 'hur dur meta evul" is the extend of allowed specificity?
There's nuance to evil.
So naive.
Who is going to be swayed by a bunch of randos on the Internet blocking an obviously evil company from joining them? Congress? They'll just buy the votes for whatever they need. I know nothing about this topic, but it is very obvious that letting an evil company associate with the federal can only make things worse. They're a bad actor, ergo, we should not do what they want.
Is threads.net going to hit the top of "most defederated" list? People hate it even more than gab and truthsocial.
I'm not too worried about Threads joining the metaverse. What Mark Zuckerberg has failed to realise is just how barebones his Twitter clone is.
Mastodon has support for trending topics and hashtags. Threads doesn't. Lacking such an absolutely basic feature that any microblogging platform would otherwise support is why Threads dropped from 500M active users to just a fraction of it.
I joined it near launch, made a few posts and then stopped. There is nothing worthwhile on Threads and I don't think leeching on to the fediverse.
Also, I can kinda understand why you all rushed to defederate from Gab when they tried to jump on the federation bandwagon, but not Meta.
Zuckerberg doesn't need us to overtake X. He needs to actually make a functional social media app first, then put more resources into moderating it.
X is still on top despite Elon Musk's stewardship because his competitors are either too small (most federated instances), require too big of a technical hurdle for the average Joe to use (the fediverse in general), or are downright incompetent (Threads.)
Too bad people on mastodon don't have the ability to block an instance they find objectionable for themselves-- oh wait.
Not sure about Lemmy, but we can do this on mastodon. I don't need someone else deciding for me.
Tldr? Couldn't disagree more
@mypasswordis1234 I mean, what is the point in defederating while being in a Lemmy instance? You cannot interact with microblog while using #Lemmy. The only thing that comes to my mind is that threads users will not be able to comment on a lemmy post or comment, but let's be honest, the way communities will probably federate to #threads (the same way it is today with mastodon*) is not good, thus reducing the amount of attraction a lemmy post can get over there.
- For some weird reason in the implementation of the AP protocol, lemmy posts are seems as just a link on mastodon, the replies are complete though. If someone understand this better and wants to explain, feel free to do it.
Could threads generate so much data that it costs to much to keep an instance/server running?
In my opinion all big player are just federating to destroy the fediverse or take it over. Why else would they be here? There is just no need for them to be here exept to kill competition before it gets to big.
That is beyond offensive. As a butthole hamster shover upper, I refuse to be brought down to Zuck's level, there aint no way possible we ( hamster asshole stuffers) should be dragged through the mud and besmirch our good name. Let the robot lizard people keep him. Harumph...
Honest discourse for the purpose of highlighting any possible issues and fortifying against the EEE process. (Prepare for war; hope for peace):
Let's say they were able to join... (We should at the very least go over this possibility, as it can also help our admins decide.) How would we be able to protect our network?
Would making sure any features of one instance/app be open and able to be modified and/or gracefully integrated into another be an option? (similar to the GPL license) An example would be keeping a party from restricting access to a private network only through their app. (looking at you, gTalk and iMessage)
Any other suggestions?
lemmy.world and by extension mastodon.world is probably still waiting to see what happens. The other instance I have my account on has a rather hands-off approach to moderation soooo I hope there's some way for a user to block an instance on their own.
Better yet, let them enjoy the full connectivity for a month. Once they've enjoyed all the awesome content and got used to it - defederate.
By all means, fuck Meta to the moon and back, but for goodness' sake, users on federated servers can choose to block the domain with the same result, not to mention that admins can simply restrict it (see social.coop/@eloquence/1115888…). It just isn't so black and white as people are making it seem.
Federation with a bigger platform is realistically the only way for Fedi to become mainstream, and at the moment Meta seems at least to be trying to be communicative. And with their quite unvaluable userbase they really don't have enough leverage against the privacy-concious Fediverse to turn AP into MetaPub. For now.
@tedvdb@feddit.nl Hey :)
I'd personally at least give them a chance. Defederating is a pretty easy process and can be performed at any point in time. At least some Threads users may as well get to know about Lemmy and switch to it.
Upd: yes I do understand many people don't trust Meta and neither do I. But I also understand lots and lots of users here are using anonymous accounts, and federation information is already public to begin with. Combining the fact that Fediverse may gain more than it may lose, including more users, original content, recognition and etc, I generally think it's worth the risk. I am generally content with any decision, just sharing my two pennies of thought.
I highly recommend using Boost for Lemmy for mobile use. One simple reason at the moment (there are many): it has a tagging feature that allows you to display text next to a user's handle. ITT there are 4-5 users I've tagged as centrist or right wing trolls and they are all the fuck over the thread, arguing in favor of Facebook being a part of the fediverse. This does not surprise me in the least, but at least the tagging helps me immediately identify the shitbirds making bad faith arguments so I can easily ignore their garbage opinions.
For default, they are unfederated in threads.
Also, are you sure you want the mass don't know what the federated web is? We are a low number of users. If we want to me the new standard of internet, we need the people to know what de Fediverse is. And threads can be that first door, and then they can start to spread to other more suitable stances.
I just want to extend the conversation.
For default, they are unfederated in threads.
Do you mean instances have just all unfederated or that it's built into Lemmy itself?
I haven't heard anything on threads in a while so I'm not sure how well it took off but I agree that having something like threads could bring in more users.
Honestly I like the vibe of Lemmy and the fediverse now but I definitely do miss how there was a community for everything.
I guess those nonstop arguments about Palestine and Israel will creep over if we don't defederate Threads. That is literally all I ever see in there nowadays.
What's next? Discord federates with Matrix? Give me a break.
This is the way.
they are
Let the user decide. If lemmy/mastodon user wants to block threads, let them. Defederating entirely is idiotic gatekeeping.
Better yet, I'll request the admin specifically to federate with Threads, so that I can move across the stuff that I care about to mbin from the Threads app.
Yes allowing corps into the Fediverse is very short-sighted.
While I'm cool with blocking threads.net, "we should block all corps from the Fediverse" doesn't make sense and that's a bad cause to focus on
It's fine if an instance wants to make that their policy, the fediverse gives an instance the freedom to do so, but it would provide little gain for a lot of annoyance
Other bad reasons:
- "Meta can spy on us": they can do that even without threads.net, and federating makes little difference there
We certainly should keep corps at a 1km pole from here.
They come and ruin everything they tough in the name of profit. Can they force their way? Partially, maybe, in some ways. But if we welcome them with open doors, it will get way worse. The last thing we should do is give up and say "they'll get their dirty hands into this anyway".
Let's keep this place tidy of bullshit, pretty please.
We can take precautions against their nonsense by enforcing the standards, and we can educate people about why it's a problem. That becomes difficult if we just close off entirely. We can't have an impact on things we close off to and ignore
I don't think we should give up or welcome them with open doors, I just think there's more nuance to it than "defederate from any fediverse thing tied to a for profit entity"
Facebook's case is special because of their nasty history with control and abuse, so if people want to be extra aggressive with them then I'm good with it
Do you understand what corporations do?
I've got some understanding yes
I think most people here have a similar sentiment around corporations and big tech companies, which is why we're on this platform and why we donate to keep them run by nonprofits
I'm snarky because I'm annoyed at seeing the constant FUD being lauded around here. Sorry if that snark comes off as hostile.
Yes, Meta is a shit corp who doesn't deserve any free pass. However, ActivityPub wasn't built with exclusion in mind. Nor does the protocol allow Meta access to anything that you aren't already giving up freely to thousands upon thousands of other servers (many of whom cannot or will not respect your rights to data privacy) whenever you use any Fediverse platform.
People who are scared of Meta joining the Fediverse simply do not understand how the Fediverse works, or misunderstand the design philosophy of ActivityPub.
You are free to make your own Mastodon/Lemmy instance and federate with them. Being able to block instances is user choice which absolutely IS the point of ActivityPub. There is no one entity that says you must federate or must defederate.
Yeah, close that protocol! Build the walls around our garden higher! No need to wait for them to actually do something worth defederating over, we just don't like them!
This is silly. A major social media network is trying to join the Fediverse and everyone's keen on stopping it. If Meta does something dirty or damaging, sure, defederate them then. But I was kind of hoping that open protocols would flourish, not just end up as another bunch of balkanized forums and Reddit-likes.
How are we supposed to do that when people like you are encouraging admins to defederate which removes any semblance of freedom of choice that you are fucking trying to imply we act upon?
They're a multinational corporation, they don't need us to host their shit for you to be able to read a goddamn article and learn something.
If you don't yet understand that they're evil that's on you.
What if some of us don't care if they're evil?
This is what I'm thinking. I don't understand why people fled from the corporate internet only to be excited to go back to them.
When you fuck over people with their freedoms, you don't deserve the freedom to be extended to you.
It's the same as paradox of tolerance. You shouldn't be tolerant to intolerance, and you shouldn't give freedom to those who want to strip it away from you.
That's like freedom 101.
Or build my own, which is great to have as a contingency.
If you're self-hosting a personal instance, do whatever you want.
But if you're hosting a community for other people, you should consider what they want. That's the responsibility of a community leader.
Sign up on Threads if you want Threads content. Fucking duh.
You can spin up your own server... That's what the fediverse is.
The freedom to do whatever you want as an admin, and the freedom of choosing another server where you'll still be part of the network
Meta/Facebook threatens this, because their user base dwarfs the rest of the fediverse. They're also running their own closed source server code... They can gatekeep their own federation
I would love it if companies joined the fediverse, but like, by making instances. Maybe even use it for their internal Intranet. Maybe they could add federation compatible APIs to their existing software
I don't want a massive social network company to use their position to make a new social network...
Federation is like Bitcoin or Tor - it's decentralized, until one org becomes too large... At that point, they can control the network in countless ways
Ever play Plague Inc? The secret to winning is to not become deadly until you've already become engrained and established throughout society. Then you add the deadly features once you're too deep in.
Don't let the cancer establish itself as something innocent. The owner of the platform WILL take any opportunity to seize control of the media so it can seize control of the message.
I just love this comparison 🥰
"yes, they kill, torture, brutalize, pillage, and kick puppies, but if we don't allow them an equal voice, can we truly say we are any better?"
Yes. Yes we can.
I honestly don't understand how some of you have this point of view. This isn't a they've been evil once or twice thing. This is a they've been evil at every single opportunity and actively seek out more opportunities to be evil for well over a decade and you're a fucking moron for trusting them thing.
That's the only way to do it with minimal damage.
Defederating after this happens will cause a giant strain on the Fediverse and will simply accelerate the problems for which we don't want Meta here in the first place.
For some reason I can't dowvote this, so: this is a fucking stupid take
Federation means you can defederate for any reason. It's not a set of principles, it is an ontological arrangement whereby power is distributed. Plenty of users will look for defederated instances to join because keeping facebook out of our shit is what we want. You are free to find instances that are federated. Nobody will stop you.
And as for things they've done, personally I find that knowingly stoking genocide in Myanmar is enough for me to not give them any more chances.
How many times does Meta have to show you who they are before you start paying attention?
I'd be closer to agreeing with you if XMPP didn't completely invalidate your point. They did it there and they'll do it here.
Theres a reason nobody uses it anymore. Google extended the crap out of it, effectively took over the protocol and then retired it. It bears the same echoes of what's happening here.
This didn't happen. In fact Google was the one who fell behind development when the protocol moved on and deprecated unencrypted connections for example. People just don't make it a priority to use XMPP instead of the walled gardens they are using now.
If you like meta so much, why are you here?
Every open protocol that survives past the first couple of days of actual use, no exceptions, has some mechanism whereby bad actors can be removed.
Don't use "open protocol" as your excuse for sucking Zuck the Fuck off.
As I just said, I don't like Meta. And keep your homophobic slurs out of civil discussion.
But they are not yet a bad actor on the Fediverse because they haven't actually joined the Fediverse yet. If you're so convinced that they're going to do something awful, why the big deal about defederating preemptively?
Embrace, extend, extinguish.
You are either innocently unaware of how it works or just dissassociating from reality. Meta has to compete with Fediverse if it can't directly harvest user activity for marketing and advertising systems. They quite obviously will (have to?) do everything they can to influence technical decisions that allow them to steer the protocols in a way that is profitable rather than for the good of the end users and communities.
They ultimately will seek to build walls around their development and services on their terms and leave others not part of their profitable ecology of development outside of those walls. They are a publicly traded corporation, this is just a normal evolution in for-profit corps, even if current employees do act as positive curators of community engagement.
Defederation is part of the protocol.
At least make your rhetoric somewhat resemble reality? Please?
They're confused and likely think that federation means no rules and unconditional access to any server from your account, when it couldn't be further from the truth. I've said it elsewhere but people craving that don't want the fediverse, they want Nostr.
This place is the way it is, why it's enjoyable to be on, because we can and do defederate servers run by bots, trolls, or any other malicious actors, otherwise they run wild.
Nearly 20 years of Facebook abuse is apparently not a reason.
Holy fucking shit is the attention span of humanity getting short.
The microbloggers are a bit different than us, in that they actually try to create a "social circle." Threaded discussions with random assholes like we enjoy tend to be more focused on giving us someone to reply to.
The protocol only needed an open license that forbade profiting off user data.
This IS Facebook. It's guaranteed. They're evil. Block them now.
No I don't think I will
I can see that threads.net may harm the Fediverse. But, there might be some people that don't like the threads client and want to use the fediverse to interact with them. This will divide us. Also, trying to have a standard were threads.net is blocked is very hard to spread. Maybe has to be default on the server side, or even better, a subscription.
I'm all for defederating, but only until we know what their intentions are. I'm more worried about Mastodon than Lemmy, but still, that's not the point. The only power any of us have is to file an official complaint with the FTC and make a distinct point, not just "I hate meta/Facebook and want them to go away" it has to be a logical complaint such as "their terms of service are overstepping their boundaries and taking ownership of data on competing platforms that they do not own to lock out competitors." It's really the only thing anyone in the US can do.
I would hate for the fediverse to die by zuck the cuck's hand, but the sad truth is open source is the enemy of corporate platforms, and it's encouraging enough that ActivityPub is enough of a threat to Meta that they're willing to go to these measures to make sure their bottom line isn't harmed. The real fucked up thing is their intention to farm other platforms users with their consent and that's the real problem.
I think we should let meta federated to the fediverse until they try to influence it or integrate ads in posts or something else that can hurt the fediverse
Are we not discussing the choice to defederate? As in most choices, some options are better than others. Sometimes it isn't obvious what the best option is. People discuss and share ideas to make their decision.
We as a community are faced with the choice of whether or not to support threads[.]net. We can think about it individually, or on an instance-by-instance basis - but we can also discuss it collectively. That's whats happening here.
What a lame take.
Go to their server if you want to or one that don't defederate, or spin one up yourself, the choice is still yours.
I don't want meta to benefit from my server, hosting their biased crap, how about that for a user choice.
It's your freedom as an admin to block them, but indeed the cost is the freedom of your users to communicate with people on Threads. As a user I would prefer an instance that doesn't restrict my communications in that way.
Freedom isn’t letting everything be or letting anyone do anything.
I only talked about communicating with Threads users not "anything".
When meta kills off 99% of Lemmy servers
Why should Meta be able to do this?
Sure is, he's saying I should Not defederate my server, and I do not say he should do anything at all. Are you just trolling?
If he likes meta so much, just go there, you can still have your Lemmy account.
Or go to a server not defederating.
How hard can it be.
You directly told me to spin up my own server if I don't like it lol, I didn't tell anyone to do anything. Sharing an opinion isn't the same thing as telling people what to do.
Nah. More content and a lower percentage of extremists is a good thing.
Sadly i dsagree with you, nobary cares about this peace of junk (seriously, microblog without hashtags?). Also i think is fedverse is a great place in general and i trust in all instances moderators, and any bot or think like this have interesting in us. I don;t worry about, for me is one more day with meta bulshit, thatś it
If I don't like it I won't look at it, simple as.
The preemptive strike is interesting. The cost will be a lack of knowledge. We know our enemy but we don't know them on this terrain yet.
No we're not. Read up on what happened to xmpp. Google joined it, made the service much slower for people not on their servers, everybody joined their servers, they shut their service down for their own proprietary stuff.
Edit: https://ploum.net/...
Embrace
Extend
Extinguish
made the service much slower for people not on their server
I call bullshit. People not using Google servers were unaffected. The problem is people using walled gardens instead of making XMPP compatibility a requirement.
I really don't think that's the case.
This is a nice little place, meta barging in Will fuck it all up
If Kbin defederates from Threads, I'll just leave Kbin, and stay with Threads. Defederating over vibes is not how the fediverse is supposed to operate. And for everyone advocating for this dumb idea, I'm just using this thread as a honey pot.
No, the entire point is that you're free to go to whatever instance you want and/or host your own with your own rules. You're more than welcome to go to one that doesn't defederate, just as every instance owner/admins are free to defederate. It's not how "the fediverse is supposed to operate" because a standard for how the fediverse is supposed to operate doesn't exist.
Once they can interact with your account, they can pull your data into their server and analyzing it to deliver ads campaign.
And whenever an account from Threads upvote/ downvote or reply to your comments/posts or vice versa, Meta will analyze that and they can sell ads based on your political leanings, gender, geo-location, hobbies, marital status etc.
That's the options from what I saw from fb ads dashboard years ago. If you're from US, that options are broader and more detailed.
Please let the door hit you in the ass on the way out
@lemmy.world
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, Mbin, etc).
If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!
Rules
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.
Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration)
go to feed...
@lemmy.world
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, Mbin, etc).
If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!
Rules
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.
Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration)
go to feed...
Yeah dude let’s just federate with an instance maintained by a corporation that has undoubtedly caused a genocide in Myanmar by turning a blind eye to a far-right hate speech group that caused an entire fucking minority to flee into another country.
I don’t get why people are supporting and saying “oh it must be up to the user” like bro this is the company we’re dealing with. Fuck that fuck threads fuck zuckerberg i don’t want his shit cancer near something that’s going well so far.
save