Do we really want Facebook users just for the growth? Quality beats quantity.
this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2023
189 points (89.5% liked)
Fediverse
28243 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
Give them a taste and then defederate...
The good thing about the fediverse is that instances can choose with whom they want to federate.
In my opinion, there should always be choice and people with terrible opinions should be allowed to express them – just like others should be allowed to laugh, ignore and block them. Whether we like it or not, the fediverse includes everything from left-wing to right-wing extremists. But we can choose an instance which excludes all those unwanted posts, just like we'll be able to block surveillance corporate instances.
Ultimately I think I'll end up running two accounts
I respect if my Mastodon instance decides to defederate because of a legitimate threat from Facebook, given the company's consistently awful history.
There will also be some good people worth following who want to use FB's Threads for whatever reason. If I need to, I can use some special frontend or web browser version to read the content.
So whether we stay federated or not, at the end of the day it'll be ok as far as being able to see things from the people I care about.
In the meantime, I'm going to bring as many people over to the real Fediverse before people get settled into one or the other
I do. I love my following on Threads but I hate how fragmented social media has become post Twitter. It'll be nice to follow everyone on one account - mainstream and otherwise.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Fediverse? Do you mean, the Threadiverse?
I'm being cheeky to illustrate a point - Threads will almost certainly harm the overall health of the Fediverse in the long run, with users relying increasingly more on Threads' instance[s] to use Mastodon services and connect to people.
This may be a cynical view, but even if that does happen, the core ActivityPub protocol will still be intact and at worst be relegated to a small community of tech nerds, which is to say, basically the status quo.
The core of the software will be intact, but the community will be broken - because once Threads pulls the plug (EEE), instead of a stable community you'll have a shrinking one.
Or from another angle, they won't be able to entirely pull the plug. If they try to but users still want to be on mastodon, they can find another way.
That said, I support the immediate defederation with any threads instances.
They can pull it - most users in Threads will be interacting with other Threads users and content. Mastodon will be simply "that ideologically weird corner", and in practice they won't miss it.
For scale: Threads currently has 100M users. The Fediverse as a whole has 1.5M.
load more comments
(2 replies)
the core ActivityPub protocol will still be intact
Will it though? My guess is they're working on "fixing it" to what they want 24/7.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Isn't threadiverse already a term to specifically describe the kbin/lemmy/etc. style of fediverse service?
It's both, it depends on context.
Here I mean a Fediverse that is mostly controlled by Threads.
I think you mean WASN'T threadiverse already a term.
Yet, it used to be. Soon, it won't be.
Eh, I can see politicians self hosting their own instances from their party or what have you. Same with governments. There is a potential as well that x.com may decide to federate out of survival if it gets too big.
Why would they self-host and do work when they could just use Threads? It's not like FB gives a fuck about treasonous political parties.
The same reason Trump has his own social network.
Own instances give a lot more control. They can be as outrageous as they like, full on Trumpian, even. They can also control what gets said in that space much more effectively, seeing as how they are the mods and admins. And they don't have to worry about Meta or Reddit (I doubt Musk even cares) getting media backlash and removing them from the platform entirely.
Sure, Threads can defed from any controversial instances but it will be trivial to create a mirror that effectively refederates the problem instance.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Seriously, how does that dude manage to look so inhuman? He looks like someone pretending to be human and trying really hard, but missing that one last bit.
The trick is to always be faking empathy.
And I would assume he chose that picture too. It's not as bad at full size, at least he has some color to his skin and doesn't look like an alien methhead as much.
is requirement to be billionaire
Nope. Please fuck off, thank you.
So the hate for this is now gone and replaced with praise? What happened to all the posts about how this is an attack on TNT frediverse when Meta first announced this integration?
My stance is still a hard fuck no to Threads entering the fediverse.
Edit: My reasoning can be read in my old comment here. It's all still applicable in regard to meta/Threads federating.
There's no logical reason to give them the benefit of the doubt or have unrealistically positive expectations given their overwhelmingly consistent track record.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Oh there's hate, there are a lot of unreasonably, pro-threads upvotes and comments making the rounds.
Wouldn’t be surprised if it turns out 99% of them were written by ChatGPT or whatever FBs equivalent is.
There does seem to be some real voices and understanding with some of the comments, so probably a mix of paid and chabot. If chatbot is that good, we are really in some serious trouble.
For 3 to 4 sentences LLMs are indistinguishable from humans.
You don’t start noticing the idiosyncrasies until it gets a bit more repetitive and loses coherence during longer texts.
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
That's OP's opinion and some users here, but I don't praise it and I don't think it will be good for fediverse in the future. People will start using Threads app since they can interact with other fediverse instance. And there will be more drama and more toxic content just like on fb, twitter, tiktok and ig.
This is even more concerning
I will consider to stop using lemmy..
load more comments
(1 replies)
already defederated
Fuck off. Defederate these guys.
And just remember that a substantial amount of Lemmy users want this, because they are too blind, childish and immature to see the very real negative consequences such a move will have.
But they only care because they're either bots or hopelessly stupid simps.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Someone did a breakdown here, I still think it's a great idea to defed from them immediately.
https://wedistribute.org/2023/08/threads-new-terms-affects-the-fediverse/
load more comments
(2 replies)
Lmao.
They will be able to dictate how mastodon works of they become larger than the rest of the instances. Their stake in the network will make them more powerful than all the other instances combined.
They will be able to dictate how mastodon works
How they will do that ? How are they going to dictate the programmers of Mastodon/Lemmy ?
There's a concept called Embrace, Extend, Extinguish (seemingly coined, in that form, in a Microsoft antitrust lawsuit). Here's the Wikipedia page on it: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish
As I understand, people argue that Facebook/Meta, via Threads, will use this strategy in the long-term to either kill, or make effecitvely obsolete, the open technology behind Mastodon. If not that, then they could easily make the federation part of Threads buggy & unreliable, souring their users' opinions on the "fediverse".
They don't need to control anyone; they only need to host a majority of the userbase (by being the most popular federated site). And they're not starting from a user count of 1 or 10, unlike a lot of Mastodon sites.
Obviously, Mastodon & Lemmy, and the sites that run them, can keep chugging along just fine, but it's argued that if Meta makes their federation implementation sub-par (or otherwise sabotages it), it'll hurt the user-base growth of sites that use these projects (as people will see begin to see it as unreliable or what-not).
Is it as doom and gloom as people make it seem? Idk, I haven't had time to care.
I dislike how the comment section is full of people hating on Mastodon people
Mastodon wearing the face of activitypub and fediverse really leads everyone to think it's only mastodon. Replace mastodon with activitypub, because there's lots of projects that are actually innovating instead of Mastodons (x)shitter cloning.
Good news: This will result in more average-user understanding of the fediverse, getting past the consistent issue of people not understanding it. It will increase the Fediverse's usershare by a considerable amount. And to top it all off, it will probably cause a snowball which will make the Fediverse as a whole eclipse twitter.
Bad news: This is being done by facebook, willingly. Any company that is taking action like this is doing so for their own benefit and no one elses. This may be detrimental to the Fediverse in the long run if users opt to all just jump on to Threads because of some obnoxious 'Embrace, Extend, Extinguish' tactic they may or may not pull in the future.
load more comments
(3 replies)
So seeing as the name is still threads does that mean he won the lawsuit someone filed against them to change the name as someone else already had that name for their product/company?
Like rules only exist if you're not a billionaire I guess...
view more: next ›