• @misk@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    171 year ago

    Pretty cool. I keep saying that this is a win for open standards and Meta probably does this to appease EU regulators. It’s no surprise that this happens as Threads launches In Europe.

      • Draconic NEO
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        You mean as instance blocking? Because the Lemmy devs have stated that it’s not going to work the way everybody’s assuming it’s going to work.

        So far the way that it’s been laid out it’ll only block communities on that Lemmy Instance, users will not be filtered.

        That’s ignoring the fact that Lemmy’s blocking system is already flawed in it’s design and isn’t really an effective tool against malicious users.

        So we really shouldn’t treat blocking even of instances as personal defederation, because it isn’t and unless something really changes and Lemmy’s development it never will be. You can on Mastodon because Mastodon’s blocking system is much harsher as well as the fact that federation highly depends on following, but lemmy works much differently and also has a significantly weaker blocking system (I should also add it does not respect mastodon’s blocking system) so because of that being able to block instances should not and cannot be considered an alternative to defederation, especially when it comes to malicious instances.

      • DaDragon
        link
        fedilink
        -71 year ago

        Why would you want to defederate at all? It’s akin to hiding your head in the sand, except done on a community-wide scale. Just because you can’t see the nazi over there in the bushes doesn’t mean he isn’t squatting there, observing you.

        • Spaghetti_Hitchens
          link
          fedilink
          6
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Obviously we will have to see what sort of content comes in from Threads, but knowing Meta, they will be serving a lot of ads in it. So instances will effectively be distributing Meta ads for free. Well free for Meta; the instances will incur additional costs.

        • sour
          link
          fedilink
          61 year ago

          is facebook

          why wouldn’t you want to defederate

            • Draconic NEO
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11 year ago

              They certainly have the choice to migrate. If they don’t want to it’s their problem. Fediverse wasn’t meant to be a wide open connect with anyone anywhere unconditionally network, if you want that go to Nostr (it’s filled with Right wing trolls and crypto/nft bros for that very reason). It’s meant to allow for instances to communicate and share content while still being run independently of one another. That also includes the ability to block other servers.

              • Aatube
                link
                fedilink
                01 year ago

                Facebook and the like certainly aren’t filled with right wing trolls and the fediverse is a very niche thing. They have the choice, but they might not even know it.

        • @pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          41 year ago

          He already is, this is all open? They will include people’s numbers in their “awesome wave of the future” and I don’t want that. The more people ignore them and isolate them, the more they won’t have power over everyone.

          • Aatube
            link
            fedilink
            -11 year ago

            What are “people’s numbers”? What power would they have if we didn’t defederate?

            • @pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              81 year ago

              Dude, facebook is evil, we all know that. I have no idea how they plan to take over the fediverse, but they’re planning it. Do you remember when they first announced and then everyone suddenly started calling it the threadiverse? They have plans, hold on to your seat.

              • atocci
                link
                fedilink
                3
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I’ve been under the impression people started using the term threadiverse to describe the Lemmy/Kbin side of the fediverse because we exist in Reddit style threads and interaction with microblog style fediverse posts is obtuse at best. We’re practically in a separate bubble over here, and that was the cause of the new term.

                Edit: The first time I saw the term used was when FediDB made a page for tracking Lemmy+Kbin users

                Edit 2: Archive.org link to the Threadiverse page from June 15th, half a month before the Threads name leaked.

                • @pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  11 year ago

                  I hadn’t heard it once until threads started up. I didn’t join until the great migration, so maybe earlier people used it, but I had only seen fediverse to describe it.

                  • atocci
                    link
                    fedilink
                    11 year ago

                    I think FediDB coined the term. It definitely existed before Threads had an official name though.

              • Aatube
                link
                fedilink
                1
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                What is the worse case scenario for me, a person living on kbin? What the heck could they do to ever possibly affect us when we can just pull the plug on them anytime?

                • @pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  8
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  by user @OtakuAltair@lemm.ee

                  If there’s one company you should preemptively block, it’s Facebook. They have a track record of destroying anything and everything they touch and there is zero reason to think it won’t be the same this time. From this post:

                  They aren’t some new, bright-eyed group with no track record. They’re a borderline Machiavellian megacorporation with a long and continuing history of extremely hostile actions:

                  • Helping enhance genocides in countries
                  • Openly and willingly taking part in political manipulation (see Cambridge Analytica)
                  • Actively have campaigned against net neutrality and attempted to make “facebook” most of the internet for members of countries with weaker internet infra - directly contributing to their amplification of genocide (see the genocide link for info)
                  • Using their users as non-consenting subjects to psychological experiments.
                  • Absolutely ludicrous invasions of privacy - even if they aren’t able to do this directly to the Fediverse, it illustrates their attitude.
                  • Even now, they’re on-record of attempting to get instance admins to do backdoor discussions and sign NDAs.

                  source

                  • @misk@sopuli.xyz
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    -31 year ago

                    This is a lot of text about Meta being evil which nobody disputes. But you didn’t answer the question.

          • @sudneo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            31 year ago

            To be honest, not a great argument, considering that the hidden magic that Google and a handful of big players do, specifically in relation to spam, is what made emails substantially an oligopoly. Today if you want to run an email server, you need to jump 20 hoops to hope your email will ever reach the mailbox of someone on Gmail. Emails were supposed to be a distributed protocol too…

              • @sudneo@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                21 year ago

                No really relevant for my point, but I assume that preventing them to be effectively part of the fediverse, can reduce the blast radius of their changes, since they will be (more) isolated.

                If they are on the other hand fully part of the fediverse (I.e. nobody defederates them) many people may be incentivised to move to “that instance” because it will realistically have better availability and in the future might have more “features”, which is exactly the kind of extensions to the protocol that other won’t be able to keep up with.

                I personally used to care more in the past, I don’t now that much, but I can definitely see the potential danger.

                • @misk@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  -11 year ago

                  The whole argument is that Meta will do whatever they want with their implementation of Activity Pub and lacks any further details. Blast radius of what? How does that affect existing Mastodon instances? Do they lose anything compared to what they have now?

                  Threads doesn’t need Mastodon users because it has orders of magnitude more already. Mastodon has unique competitive advantage, for example no ads, that could compel Threads users to switch with little friction. It might turn out that Threads will offer things Mastodon won’t on principle (follower and notification management for huge accounts) which might actually make whole ecosystem more healthy and diverse.

                  Really, it’s best to see what’s going to happen. I’m optimistic because I think open alternatives are generally better and will win long term.

                  • @sudneo@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    11 year ago

                    I don’t know what is going to happen, and as I said, I don’t even care that much to be honest.

                    Blast radius of what? How does that affect existing Mastodon instances?

                    It does if this happens gradually, when instances bleed users to Threads because it has “more features”/works better/etc.

                    I’m optimistic because I think open alternatives are generally better and will win long term.

                    Good for you, I am not sure what this optimism is grounded on, but I lost it completely. I think the battle is already lost, and open solution can -at best- represent a niche corner of the internet. People are used to things that are addictive and create expectations that are unrealistic for services run with budget at 4 digits top. There is no going back, in my opinion. Either way, this is very much besides the point of my argument, which was that email is exactly an example of how big companies can take over “open” protocols with them being left “open” but effectively having 99% of users on 2/3 providers, and a very high entry barrier which renders the “open” nature of the protocol just a formality.

    • sverit
      link
      fedilink
      English
      31 year ago

      Pretty cool at first glance. Not so cool when they have pulled in enough users and then remove the federation.

      • @misk@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        They have orders of magnitude more users than all Mastodon instances combined already.

    • atocci
      link
      fedilink
      31 year ago

      I’m looking forward to federation. My stance on it is that I don’t want to use Threads, but I want to follow and interact with the people who do. Best of both worlds like this.