(Apparently) Unpopular Opinion: I think defederating Threads is the wrong move, because it just locks people into Threads. If people on Twitter had the ability to move to Mastodon AND still interact with all the people they did before, I think we would have seen even more people move. The only reason I still check twitter at all is because I have a few close friends who didn't move. Meta is likely going to have big adoption of people who aren't ready to go to Mastodon, but are interested in getting out of the dumpster-on-fire that twitter seems to continue to be. But blocking those people from being able to join the more popular Lemmy instances, given no actual policy violations, just will keep people in Meta that otherwise could leave. With the "however" being: It's not quite clear to me that Threads users will be interacting with Lemmy as much Mastodon, if Threads were a Reddit replacement, it's more directly connected.

[–] Anubis@lemmy.world 22 points 2 years ago (2 children)

The problem isn't with the user base. It's with Meta and their business practices. People very simply do not trust Meta or Facebook and with good reason.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (18 replies)

[–] maiion@chat.maiion.com 28 points 2 years ago (1 children)

My instance as well as the other Lemmy and Mastodon instances on this list have blocked Threads.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] AlgonquinHawk@lemmy.ml 27 points 2 years ago (32 children)

Can someone ELI5 this situation to me? Not sure what Meta can do to instances/the Fediverse.

[–] DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world 26 points 2 years ago (3 children)

The will federate, try their best to suck as many users from fediverse as possible into threads, then defederate and become a walled garden again.

As for how they will suck users away:

Make their algorithms prefer posts from threads, so anyone wanting to reach a wider audience needs to move to threads
Add twitter like checkmarks that are only available for users of threads (they will say it is for security since they need to verify the idwntity of checkmarked people)
Add features that are not exposed on activity pub, so that you have to be on threads to use them (twitter did the same by for example not making polls available over API)
Intentionally make their activity pub slow and unreliable to make it look like other instances are broken and threads is fast and reliable.
Probably much more

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments (31 replies)

[–] polskilumalo@lemmygrad.ml 26 points 2 years ago (2 children)

These are very good news, I just hope more instances beyond lemmy.ml do so too.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] pattmayne@sh.itjust.works 25 points 2 years ago

Good news! Fuck Zuck!

[–] Fapper_McFapper@lemmynsfw.com 23 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I am so in love with Lemmy right now.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] exocortex@discuss.tchncs.de 20 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (12 children)

How does that work? Is threads using a protocol compatible to lemmy? (And I fully agree with the preemptive blocking of any facebook stuff).

Edit: thanks for all the detailled answers.

So Facebook tries the old EEE - Embrace Extend Extinguish. 1.A big company is Embracing an open source standard ("we're friendly, see?) They get a lot of users that way - even the open source savvy types. 2.they start Extending that standard "to make it even better" - but not talking about these changes with the rest of the community first. They cannot react quickly enough and become incompatible with the new version of this standard. 3.Extinguish. When all the users are effectively using the big companies platform with something that isn't the original standard anymore they change it so much that it isn't compatible at all anymore or replace it completely.

load more comments (12 replies)

[–] Nibbler@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Sweet action! After hearing about Lemmy.world not doing the same i'll be switching instances. It's great that I can make that decision.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments