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".

(page 3) 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Nobody@lemmy.world 16 points 11 months ago (24 children)

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.

load more comments (24 replies)

[–] Delusion6903@discuss.online 15 points 11 months ago (4 children)

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

[–] Scrollone@feddit.it 13 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (7 children)

I agree, I don't want a blanket ban on Threads. I know Meta is a horrible company, but we shouldn't decide in advance.

Honestly, I'd be very happy to be able to follow people on Threads through my privacy-respecting Mastodon/Lemmy app. Because, let's be serious: we're just a bunch of nerds here. If I want to follow famous people or companies, I'm going to find them on Meta's platforms, not here.

ActivityPub lets me follow those accounts without using Meta's apps, which are famously riddled with ads, trackers and whatnot.

load more comments (7 replies)

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] bulwark@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago (2 children)

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] masimatutu@nerdica.net 11 points 11 months ago (30 children)

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.

load more comments (30 replies)

[–] TheFederatedPipe@kbin.social 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

@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.

[–] masimatutu@nerdica.net 11 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

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.

ActivityPub allows two post formats, Notes and Articles. Articles support titles and therefore posts on Lemmy and threads on /kbin use them, while notes do not and are therefore used for microblogging and commenting. Currently Mastodon's article federation only goes so far as linking the post for content, and to be honest I'm doubtful whether Threads will federate Articles at all given their carefulness with federation.

[–] EtherWhack@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago (3 children)

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?

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments