this post was submitted on 15 Dec 2023
145 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37742 readers
997 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
145
submitted 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) by fer0n@lemm.ee to c/technology@beehaw.org
 

Adam Mosseri:

Second, threads posted by me and a few members of the Threads team will be available on other fediverse platforms like Mastodon starting this week. This test is a small but meaningful step towards making Threads interoperable with other apps using ActivityPub — we’re committed to doing this so that people can find community and engage with the content most relevant to them, no matter what app they use.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Engywuck@lemm.ee 103 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (7 children)

And I have moved my mastodon account to an instance who actively defederated Threads. I'm not interested in interacting with anyone on that network.

And I'm fucking sick of the "content relevant for me" thing. I interact with people asking/giving help, discussing and so on. Mindlessly consuming "content" is simply a disease.

[–] ripcord@kbin.social 26 points 11 months ago

Mindlessly consuming “content” is simply a disease.

Agreed. It's like a lot of other unhealthy addictions.

[–] skullgiver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl 15 points 11 months ago (4 children)

I don't get why Mastodon servers feel the need to fully defederate from Threads. Silencing them is much better. It allows your users to follow Threads accounts without people who don't know anyone on that side getting overwhelmed by the global timeline, as Threads is about twelve times bigger than the entire rest of the Fediverse combined.

Nobody is moving from Threads to Mastodon because mastodon.zip decided to defederate all you're doing by blocking them is preventing the users with friends who use Threads from using your site correctly.

Of course some platforms, like Lemmy and Kbin, don't support moderation features like silencing, it makes sense to fully defederate in those cases, but only because of technical restrictions, really.

[–] shnizmuffin@lemmy.inbutts.lol 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

How many reasons does Meta have to give before distrust is the default?

"Hey, admin, why can't I follow my mom on threads from your instance?"

"Because Meta facilitated genocide in Myanmar."

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] fer0n@lemm.ee 8 points 11 months ago

It’s great that everyone is able to choose for themselves

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 58 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 children)

Anyone who doesn't understand that connecting in any way to Facebook is not a good thing .... is either very naive, or complicit to wanting to take down the fediverse.

Facebook already has enough content and enough of a platform on their own -- they literally control half of the worldwide social media network. Why do they want to spread into this new space?

The only reason they want to be on this side is to conquer or destroy.

[–] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 46 points 11 months ago (4 children)

This perspective of "Either you agree with me or you're complicit in a conspiracy against me" is incredibly childish and immature.

Sometimes people have different opinions than you. Try to find a way to deal with it.

[–] 1984@lemmy.today 30 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

To me it's like warning someone to not stand in the middle of the highway, and having some guy go "don't tell me what to do, I have the right to disagree with you".

There are idiots in the world and their opinions are actually idiotic. :)

It's 100% super obvious that Meta wants to control the fediverse, and that's why they are coming for it.

[–] bownage@beehaw.org 12 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Can you explain how it's 100% super obvious? I thought a popular platform with many users entering the fediverse might be good for exposure but it seems like the consensus here is that it's actually bad. Help me understand how it's bad?

[–] smeg@feddit.uk 16 points 11 months ago (6 children)
  1. Most people using a service don't want it to suddenly explode with new users who might not behave in the way that old users like
  2. Facebook don't want to just be another instance and have a lovely time with everyone, at best they want to seek profit, and based on every other way they seek profit it will be by tightly controlling the experience, filling it with ads, and selling off user data (i.e. all things that most of us came here to escape from)

In summary we know everything Facebook does is pretty evil, it's "super obvious" that this will therefore be pretty evil too, right?

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

selling off user data (i.e. all things that most of us came here to escape from)

Since almost everything on the Fediverse is open for all to see, anyone can already be mining the data just by setting up their own instance of Lemmy or Mastodon. This might make it difficult to sell fediverse-generated data for profit.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (5 children)

Normally and with very many other issues ... I would agree with you ... but on this issue I'm very adamant about what I see and believe.

Think about it ... Facebook is a billion dollar corporation and they show interest in your little world and the little things you are doing and they want to join you. This is a company that already has billions invested in systems that already have billions of users and millions of dollars of man power and technological resources. Why do they want to step into what we are doing here? Why do they feel a need to step into our space? Do they need more users? Do they need help from us?

Big corporations are only interested in perpetual growth at all costs. They are also deathly afraid of competition or the potential of future competition. Look at the history of manufacturing, automotive corporations over the past hundred years ... it's a long history of the strong eating the weak.

I agree my argument may sound childish or extreme but in this instance it's pretty clear ... if you let them in, it's basically the beginning of the end for the fediverse.

It's the metaphorical Trojan Horse .... once it's inside and firmly established, everything will be lost.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 7 points 11 months ago

Sometimes people have different opinions than you.

They're saying that those opinions are naïve.

[–] Ilandar@aussie.zone 7 points 11 months ago

I see you conveniently left out the bit where they said people could also just be naive. Kind of funny how you attempted to take the moral high ground and lecture this person like they were a small child, yet you yourself cherrypicked in bad faith just to have some little takedown moment. One of you certainly came off more childish and immature in this exchange and it wasn't the other guy.

[–] DarthYoshiBoy@kbin.social 13 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Your Mastodon data is already an open book to Meta if they care to have it. The protocol is open, they could already be black-ops scooping up everything that's fit to federate without turning on Threads federation, so them doing that really changes nothing. And what I mean by that is that they could already have set up unknown instances to leech whatever data they want out of the Fediverse, which instances masquerade as normal mom and pop installs just federating and sucking up everything without bringing anything back to the table. There's literally nothing stopping them from leeching everything out of the Fediverse at any time other than people being better at detecting their activity (and actively thwarting that activity) than Meta is at keeping it off the radar.

In this case they're making it so that I might have a chance to follow and interact with people already in the Meta/Instagram/Threads atmosphere without having to convince those people to leave the confines of what they're comfortable with and find a Mastodon instance to sign up for. Maybe they'll be more comfortable with leaving Meta after dipping their toes in the open spec?

How is that not a win? If Meta/Threads decide that they want to fracture the protocol and go do their own thing later, so what? We'll go right back to where we were before they brought their users into the Fediverse. If people decide that they value the Threads extras/connections more than they value the purity of the ActivityPub protocol then maybe Meta is actually providing something that matters and we've lost by not supplying that need before the corporate interest figured out that it existed. In that case we'll deserve the death that causes in use of the open spec, but the open spec will still be there and people who want to do their own thing with it can't be stopped now. The code to run an open ActivityPub Mastodon instance is already out there and it's impossible to take it back now.

Everyone is out here decrying this as a subtle takeover of the Fediverse by Meta, but did Facebook "takeover" the HTTP spec when they started operating facebook (dot) com on the world wide web over the HTTP protocol? It's an insane assertion. I've been running my own opensource web servers since well before Facebook was a thing and I've continued to do so despite most people opting to depend on a mega-corp to be steward of their online presence. That Meta has a very successful and popular website that I've never been a fan of has never impacted my ability to use the open protocol they operate on to continue doing my own thing. The same thing will be true here.

It really seems like people are just upset that Threads might bring ActivityPub to the mainstream and force them to contend with the realization that a diaspora of open spec implementations already lost the war to Meta/Facebook. We had that once before. It was called the World Wide Web and you could go and find forums, fan pages, company websites, and everything else back then that has since moved to Facebook (or other content aggregator sites) because people value the network effects and homogenization more than they care about one big company being in charge of it all. (...and not to belabor the point, but most of that stuff is still out there, it's just waned in popularity because the network effects are not there.) Here we are with a chance to try and break things out again and people are seemingly worried that we can't if we let the Meta users in? Maybe they're right, maybe it's impossible to achieve victory here, but gatekeeping the standard and enacting some purity test for which providers are allowed on the protocol isn't going to tip the scales in favor of the open standards implementation.

If the protocol is truly open, then how can a corporation embracing it be a danger? We're all free to adopt any changes or not at any point in the journey so it's impossible to lose, you're free to keep doing your own thing any way you look at it. Tell me how any of this is untrue.

TL;DR: Threads coming to the Fediverse is a good thing. It'll make it possible to expand the network effects of an open protocol far faster and more than any amount of Fedinerds proselyting the gospel of ActivityPub ever will. The only thing that is at risk of being lost is that we'll refuse to adapt to what end users want fast enough to keep a large corporation from bending the spec to their ends. Which loss again only means that you'd be cutting yourself off from those who WANT to embrace the revised spec by not adopting those changes yourself. That option (to just not adopt changes to the spec) can't be taken away from you in the future, so worrying is only warranted if you feel like your ideal ActivityPub implementation can't win out in the marketplace of ideas and that you're owed that victory even if others are able to expand it in ways that people actually want to use enough to dismiss whatever downsides it contains.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Engywuck@lemm.ee 12 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Tell that to @Gargron@mastodon.social (the creator of Mastdon, AFAIK). He's very excited about this. And I can't honestly understand why.

https://mstdn.social/@Gargron@mastodon.social/111576826633308486

[–] maegul@lemmy.ml 12 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Well he's not alone ... a number of relatively vocal "fedi-advocates" are positive about it too, even those who also acknowledge that meta/facebook are fucked and defederating from them would make sense.

Which reveals, I think, a curious phenomenon about tech culture and where "we" are up to.

From what I can tell, mainstream Silicon Valley tech culture has permeated out fairly effectively over the decades such that there are now groups of people walking around who consider themselves "the good guys" and have generally progressive political views and believe in OSS and the importance of community etc but are also fundamentally interested in building some tech, making it grow in usage and effecting some ideology or agenda through creating "significant" technology. Some of them seem to have money, or tech know-how or a network into such things and some experience working in the tech world. They're all mostly, to be fair, probably middle aged white cishet men.

When face-to-face with the prospect of having "your thing" accepted by and (technically) grown to the size of Meta/Facebook/IG, these people seem to not be able to even think about resisting. "Growing the protocol" and "growing" mastodon is what they see here and all the rest is noisy nuance.

This may not be the full corporate buy out worth millions, because they're "the good guys" and don't work for big-corps, but this is the equivalent in their "ethical-tech" world ... the happy embrace of a big-corp on OSS terms.

Which in many ways makes sense, except in the case of social media so much is about culture and values and trust that sheer "growth" might completely miss the point especially if it's by riding on the back of a giant that would happily eat or crush you at a whim and has done so many times in the past.

And this is where I'm up to on this issue ... both sides seem not to be talking about it much.

What is the "emotional", "social fabric", "vibes and feelings" factor in all this ... that a place, protocol and ecosystem, predicated on remaking the social web with freedom, independence, humanity and fairness at its core, openly embraces the inundation and invasion of the giant for-profit evil big-corp social media entity this place was defined against? How are we all supposed to feel when that just happens ... when Zuck and all the people on his platform is literally just here, not with some consternation but the BDFL's loud gesture of welcoming embrace? I'm betting most will feel off ... like something is wrong. The vibe will shift and fall away a bit ... passion and senses of ownership will decay and we may even ask ourselves ... "what was the point of coming here in the first place?".

Now, to be real, it's not like a big-corp connecting over AP can be prevented, it's an open protocol after all. But the whole thing would be different if there were open discussions and acknowledgement from the top about the cultural feeling of the disproportionate sizes and power here and the possibilities that it won't be completely allowed without a more decentralised model. Maybe Threads would have to create their own open source platform which people could run instances of themselves? Or maybe Mastodon could wait until the user sizes are more equal (though that's unlikely to happen anytime soon, which is kinda the point here in many ways right? ... that Mastodon is kinda giving up and saying it'd rather be a parasite on a big-corp in order to be significant than just own its niche status?)

Eitherway, it seems clear that many of the power brokers over on mastodon are there to create their own form of influence and this sort of deal with the devil is exactly the poison they're willing to drink for their ends.

For my purposes ... I don't think I'll want to hang around mastodon much after Threads federation happens ... the embrace from the BDFL and a number of users is just off putting and the platform is too crappy to care about it ... I'd rather just go back to twitter than suffer through that swampy egotistical place.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Frog-Brawler@kbin.social 9 points 11 months ago (6 children)

Yea I was really confused to read that. I’m on Kbin / Lemmy significantly more than I log in to Mastadon (I think I’ve opened that app 5 times in the past year), so now I guess I’ll just delete Mastadon.

I bet he’s getting a big bag of money.

[–] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 17 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Are you truly incapable of imagining that someone might have a different opinion than you without being bribed?

"Everyone who disagrees with me must be getting paid" is not the mature take you think it is.

[–] Frog-Brawler@kbin.social 8 points 11 months ago (6 children)

Are you truly incapable of acknowledging that large bags of money motivate people to do unpopular things sometimes?

I really don't care about Mastadon as I haven't used it much, but I couldn't really think of a good reason for federating with Meta.

[–] amju_wolf@pawb.social 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Well a good reason could be that it brings federation to the masses. You know, like everyone who uses federated networks wants it to be. This isn't some exclusive club and wider adoption is a good thing.

If only to prove that it can work.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Gnugit@aussie.zone 41 points 11 months ago

Fuck threads

[–] wesker@lemmy.sdf.org 36 points 11 months ago (4 children)

Mark Zuckerturds destroys everything he touches, and now he wants to touch you.

[–] 0xtero@kbin.social 18 points 11 months ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 8 points 11 months ago (5 children)

If this is the level of maturity that's going to represent the Fediverse, I'm almost inclined to believe they actually do have pure intentions, because there's no way this shit is financially valuable.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] static@kbin.social 29 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I can follow him on kbin.

https://kbin.social/u/@mosseri@threads.net/posts

Interoperability was the purpose of activitypub. I'm not oppossed to Meta , Tumblr and wordpress joining the fediverse.
As long as I can use an open source community platform.

[–] 520@kbin.social 47 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (16 children)

Let's hope this isn't the first step of Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. Although in reality it probably is.

[–] davehtaylor@beehaw.org 14 points 11 months ago (4 children)

It will end up being de facto EEE, the same way it's become functionally impossible to run your own email server. Sure you technically can, but the handful of big players block everything else and make it impossible to actually email anyone.

It'll be like that on the fediverse. Big companies like this will dominate the space, refuse to federate with most others except the big players, and people will realize that unless you only want a mastodon instance with like 20 people on it, it won't be worth the trouble.

[–] amki@feddit.de 13 points 11 months ago (1 children)

That's not even true, I run my own mailserver for private and a business and it works like expected.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] 1984@lemmy.today 11 points 11 months ago

Yes it is, but people are sheep. Wolf's come to get dinner.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] mojo@lemm.ee 20 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Sick, I get tons of more interesting content while being with a Mastodon instance I trust, a nice FOSS client to explore the content, and keep my privacy! If this actually bothered me, I could simply click the three dots and block the instance, so surely that shouldn't be a big deal, right?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] LainOfTheWired@lemy.lol 17 points 11 months ago (1 children)

And nothing of value was gained

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] yum13241@lemm.ee 16 points 11 months ago (2 children)

DEFEDERATE, PLEASE! Now Meta has the highest presence in the Fediverse, and they can do whatever they want to it.

[–] fer0n@lemm.ee 13 points 11 months ago (4 children)

Firstly, you can choose an instance that doesn’t federate with them. Everyone can choose for themselves. And second you didn’t read it probably, they’re testing it and there a handful of accounts that have activity pub enabled. That certainly doesn’t make them the biggest presence.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] toothpicks@beehaw.org 13 points 11 months ago

This is gross. Meta/ threads / Facebook / Instagram are evil and I hope everyone will block / defederate them

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 11 months ago (2 children)

i love how excited adam mosseri is about activitypub; it's a win win for the protocol.

being able to follow the mainstream people on threads as well as the niche people on mastodon through a foss client like megalodon and the move from threads to another instance if i get sick of it will be fantastic and will help both mastodon and threads grow in the implosion of twitter.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Gestrid@lemmy.ca 10 points 11 months ago (10 children)

Fortunately, Lemmy just launched the ability for every individual to block instances they don't like.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] drjkl@programming.dev 10 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I see we've hit the first E: Embrace. I'm betting it'll only be a few months until they're Extending the protocol. Any wagers on how long until we hit Extinguish? 3 years maybe?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Scarecrow59@lemmy.one 9 points 11 months ago (3 children)

I think this will beneficial for the fediverse overall. Thereads will eventually have to advertise. At which point hopefully other Platforms on the fediverse will become more attractive to some threads users.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] HubertManne@kbin.social 6 points 11 months ago

now metas got access to all the porns.

load more comments
view more: next ›