this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2023
1238 points (94.1% liked)
Fediverse
28220 readers
1153 users here now
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, 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), Search Lemmy
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I seriously don't understand this mindset! If meta manages to make a better product it will definitely have more users, it's just how everything works!
Users will have the option to pick between convince of meta or freedom of smaller instances. Who are we to decide for everyone?
Apt username, Problematic Consumer.
Meta is cancer. You don't let cancer grow and see if it ends up maybe causing issues or killing you. You cut every trace of it out as soon as it's detected.
Meta has never done anything to show it is a corporation that acts in good faith. In fact it has proven time and time again it is actively acting in bad faith, against people, community, and privacy interests in order to drive profit with no regard for anything else.
Kill the cancer before it kills you.
I assume people who use the fediverse cares in some way about federation, do they not?
It's like going to a community yard sale, except Amazon shows up and starts doing sales with massive discounts. They're Amazon, they're definitely going to be better at pretty much anything, and as the clearly "better" seller, everyone's going there. It's not like it's illegal or anything, users might even get to buy better stuff. But it's not really that much of a yard sale anymore is it? And the work of the people who developed the community just goes to serve Amazon. What's the point of keeping amazon in the yard sale anyway, they're more than capable of maintaining a storefront of their own. People who want to shop at Amazon can just walk through the front door of amazon fresh, it'll always be there. The yard sale maintains it's character and culture by not expecting it's smaller sellers to compete with a behemoth.
I understand your view but no, not everyone here cares about fediverse, honestly this technicalities should be abstracted for the end user. Not everyone is a nerd or have time or passion to care about fediverse, should we abandon them just because we dont like meta? No we should create a platform just as fun and easy to use as centralized platforms with better privacy and no ads.
If we keep doing this very few people will use fediverse just like what happend to matrix and others
Ding! Online community infrastructure is like leftism. If you don’t do something about accessibility for the masses, all you’re left with is a sad circle-jerk.
A free, open-source, privacy-conscious, human-moderated platform with great usability and easily accessible sounds beautiful. Also, sounds decades away and probably utopic, given the amount of time and resources needed to make all that possible. And when you start focusing on just getting funding to keep growing, well, you end up being Meta.
I really really hope I'm proven wrong as soon as possible
For real, freaking out about defederating so early is going to become a real problem if we do it every time someone new moves in.
Also do people really want Twitter to remain the only mainstream option for microblogging? Mastodon is great, but more competitors is only a good thing.
"Someone new" moving in is very different from "monopolistic mega corporation who have intentionally acted to harm users, invade privacy and spread misinformation" moving in.
Big corporations staying out of the Fediverse is the best outcome.
Meta and other big for profit players in social media have a bad history. Privacy, ads, profits at all cost. The people concerned about this early on are basing it off the previous behaviors of these companies.
I feel like it's a good and early immune response.
If it's not technically possible for them to show me ads, see my ip, private messages etc how is this harmful?
I'm thinking in terms of the future.They'll have profit incentives to find ways acquire whatever data they can profit from. While they may not be able to do certain things now, companies like this chip away bit by bit in the long term.
With their incentives, resources, and prior behavior, I'm not certain what they can add would be worth whatever the positive result of their profit making activity.
Edits: spelling.
Not everyone just accepts “how everything works”. If you don’t understand yet that not everyone here is a liberal capitalist (or a specter of a tankie), buckle up buttercup!