Sorry. I know it’s getting a bit annoying with all these posts obsessing over this subject but still…
Just to make my position absolutely clear from the start of this - I think the entire fediverse should defed from anything under any form of commercial control, which clearly includes Threads (when/if it enables ActivityPub).
I see a lot of instance admins are adopting a ‘wait and see’ approach to defederating from Threads. With respect, I’d like to ask them - what are you waiting to see? Evidence that Meta is an immoral organisation? Surely you can’t be that naive?
Or is it evidence that Threads will attempt dodgy things with the ActivityPub codebase? That they will attempt Embrace-Extend-Extinguish? If that’s so, I again ask you with respect, surely you can’t be that naive? When Meta start introducing little, disarmingly helpful, tweaks to ActivityPub, will your ‘wait and see’ stance continue? And when Meta role out their own version of the protocol, urging Mastodon, Lemmy etc to adopt it - its free! Its better! - will you still continue to ‘wait and see’?
The privacy thing I don’t feel is (currently) much of an issue. Meta could easily scrape all our data tomorrow if they felt like it. What I fear is privacy after they’ve introduced all their ‘improvements’ to ActivityPub and released their own version. Maybe we’ll end up with a two-state fediverse where one state is happy to federate with Meta and the other is not.
The fediverse was built on the principles of open standards and open source, by people, not commercial orgs. It is slow growing, slow to react and in some areas slow to change. These are, in my opinion, amongst its greatest strengths. There is no endless money pot provided by investors, admins are volunteers running instances on VPS’s, software creators are people doing it as a hobby. This is people power, not money power. There’s no profit motive. The second such a massive profit driven org gets a foothold - and is allowed to - that changes. It’s simply inevitable.
Is the fediverse perfect? Of course not. But I believe the problems it faces can be overcome with patience and persistent forward thinking.
Then there is the fact that some instances (and hopefully increasingly more) are seen as safe areas for gay people, trans people, non-white people, women. Opening the door to Meta means opening the door to a whole shit storm of awful people whom we currently don’t have the tools to protect communities from. Is ‘wait and see’ really a good idea given the fact this almost certainly will happen? I mean ‘wait and see’ what exactly? And yes, I know we have our home-grown awful people here and guess what? We struggle to contain them already! Threads got more signups in the first 12 hours of its existence than the entire current population of the whole fediverse. You want to ‘wait and see’ how many of those people are cunts? Because the answer is ‘a lot’.
The fact is - the fediverse doesn’t need Threads, or any corporate involvement. Yes, its already smaller than Threads, it’s smaller than Twitter, it’s smaller than Reddit. But, at the risk of leaving myself open to obvious jokes, why does size matter? There’s already, in my opinion, enough people throughout the fediverse, esp on Mastodon and Lemmy, to have created places where their is good, lively, vibrant discourse. I’d much rather have quality over quantity. There’s nothing actually wrong with slower, more manageable growth. We’ve all got sucked into believing the bigger something is the better it must be and that unchecked growth is healthy. If we’re growing uh, ‘house plants’ then that might be the case, but we’re not. Because the fediverse is not (currently) motivated by profit, we don’t need unchecked growth. I’ve seen so many reddit refugees recently talking about how much better the ‘feel’ is on Lemmy, how much less pressure and angst and nastiness there is. I can’t think of a single scenario in which instantly adding double the amount of people, some of whom are pretty terrible, without decent tools to manage them, all operating under the control of a company known to embrace/extend/extinguish and who’s sole motivation is profit at all costs can be beneficial to the fediverse.
Imagine how few people would be using email if all the regional ISP’s decided that they were going to preventatively block their users from being able to send / receive email from larger providers like Yahoo or Gmail.
Imagine starting a new communication service that would replace email and not preemptively blocking known bad actors like email companies that hosted scams. How many people are going to want to use that?
But imagine if 95% of everyone you know used the evil crappy corporate email, and not the super-utiopian one.
Because both are “free”, the reality is that almost everyone will use the email that actually lets them email other people.
On lemmy, I’m not here for everyone I know. If I wanted to be in touch with them I’d probably still have a Facebook account.
On Lemmy, individual people don’t really matter that much. You’re following topics & communities.
You can technically do the same on Mastodon, but the weird stigma people just can’t shake against #hashtags hinders it somewhat. Like it or not, Mastodon/Twitter/Threads-type content – much like email – is very person-focused.
You’re right, we’d certainly have a lot less spam to deal with.
Spam largely does not originate from these email providers, instead the open nature of email allows for spammers to easily spin up their own SMPT servers and go wild. Have you used email before?
Sure, I get that. I was thinking of the largely corporate spam that do use large providers protocols to send their email.
It’s SMTP by the way, not SMPT.
I can block (unsubscribe) from corporate spam, just like I can block certain communities. But I don’t want to completely remove myself from ever receiving another email from a gmail/yahoo account all together.
If they respect your unsubscribe request, for sure.
The fact is though, you could block all emails originating from, say, GMail. You could even pre-emptively do it. Those kind of tools don’t really exist across the entirety of the Fediverse on a per-user basis - yet.
But what’s the best way to prevent corporate spam? Don’t use their services. Don’t allow them to access your details.
I also want to defed from Threads, but I appreciate the mature and non-knee jerk reaction of these instance owners to stand by the “innocent until proven guilty” stance within the fediverse. I’m sure the leashes will be very short and defed will occur at the first sight of EEE. I think it’s appropriate to watch and listen before making decisions.
I’m choosing to remain optimistic that they will recognize it and shut it down immediately. Even tho I too despise corporations and wish them nothing but failure. I avoid Facebook and instagram like the plague because it just breeds negativity and hatred. I don’t think for even a moment that Meta is trying to turn a leaf.
I see it more as a balance of probabilities thing. Given Meta do EEE things, given they openly want all your private data, given the social media they’ve created so far is considered harmful to lots of people and given all they really want is to turn a profit, are they more likely to try and EEE ActivityPub or leave it alone and co-exist peacefully?
Maybe the correct stance is for instance admins to turn the wait and see approach on its head. Given the above, defederate now then wait and see if Threads behaves itself. If it does, then federate.
If we could, in retrospective do that, maybe we wouldn’t be in a state where if you want to send an email and be sure it gets delivered, you need to use one of 2/3 providers or a mail delivery service. The email example is perfect to show how big companies did kill the openness of the protocol, without any need to make it closed.
deleted by creator
Spam does not originate from large corporate email providers.
deleted by creator
Always has been.
Email is about a single source propogating information to many, which is analogous to Twitter/Mastodon/Threads
Lemmy is not like email. It is about communities of shared interests. The relationship is many to many
If I created a many to many community based platform, I would not measure success by how many speakers on another type of platform were able to interoperate
Emails are not the same as a social platform.
One is sending letters to each other, the other is opening up a discussion to the user base.
Man it’s been ages since I heard the Eternal September argument. History truly is circular.
I think the entire fediverse should defed from anything under any form of commercial control
I disagree with this point. If there was say a server about github content - news, posts about projects, questions and help for github related things would it matter if the server was ran by a independent community or github itself? I think a server ran like that would be a positive thing overall.
That said, facebook/meta/threads is out for there profiteering off the community, squeezing anyone for what anything they can get out of you and have a huge history of doing the wrong thing in the goal of profit. A company like that should not be allowed in.
Github owned by Microsoft you mean? That Github?
Glib reply aside (sorry), in my opinion, any commercially owned entity has one sole reason for its existence - profit. And in the name of pursuing that, they’ll do literally anything to achieve it. I don’t see that as a healthy thing for the fediverse.
How do people let themselves be fleeced by corporations over and over and over and over and over again?
Just stop.
Defederation requests need to be on a cool down timer Benoit they’re considered unless there’s an immediate threat. Otherwise it opens up the doors to using the equivalent of a nuke in impulsive decisions or pressure. Your instance admin might at this very moment be thinking about this even if they’re not vocal about it.
Threads won’t federate any time soon and even when they do, I suspect they’ll operate in whitelist mode. All my instances allow NSFW content, which threads doesn’t.
But in general, just because admins aren’t defederating yet does not mean that they’ll just wait and see.
I already know of one admin of a very large Mastodon instance who’s already stated they’re not going to defed and are adopting a ‘wait and see’ approach.
An admin of a small kbin instance has also announced they will take the “wait and see” approach too.
Ruud is also the admin of lemmy.world
Also, Meta/Facebook tweaking the codebase is not necessary a bad thing. While being mostly evil, it has made significant contributions to open source, maybe wait and see will allow us to copy good ideas… before defederating them, because sooner or later they will get defederated.
I don’t see them as a good Fediverse player, but preemptive defederation, before they even start to show their colors, seems like almost unfair.
The issue is that it’s more likely to be paywalled like the shit red hat/IBM is pulling with their repo code.
They don’t contribute to open source where it would impact their core business of capturing your attention to feed you ads, only where they know the benefits of open source will be applied to their backend tech stack
There’s also no reason to think they will play by the rules if users start magically moving to other fediverse platforms (as many believe could happen), they can easily mollify regulators about interoperability by pointing to their adherence to MetaPub, the incompatible ActivityPub fork they could make in an instant
How exactly is Threads going to EEE Lemmy?
I can totally see arguing this re: Mastodon. But there are some serious hoops that need to be jumped through for a user to even be able to see Mastodon-type content as a Lemmy post. Doing Mastodon on Lemmy feels like eating soup with a fork. You can technically do it with enough time and effort, but should you?
Pitchfork mobs going after Lemmy admins because they haven’t already blocked Threads makes me think that maybe the mob doesn’t really know what it is they’re against, besides just “corporations bad”.
You might need to re-read my post. I don’t believe I said Threads was going to EEE Lemmy. I referred (repeatedly) to ActivityPub. So, it’s a bit misleading to say I’m inciting a pitchfork mob.
You’re right to say Mastodon and Lemmy don’t operate seamlessly, but Mastodon users can already follow and post to Lemmy Communities. They see Communities as just another User. And the more fediverse tools develop, I’m sure this will only strengthen.
I’m also not saying ‘corporations bad’. I’m saying ‘corporations are unnecessary for the fediverse to exist and probably will do bad things’.
I read it. And one thing I definitely agree is that Meta shouldn’t be allowed to make changes to ActivityPub protocols, themselves, that make it easier for them to do bad stuff.
And while you, personally, might not be inciting the pitchfork mobs, they’re out there. There was a post last night where lemmy.ml announced that they already blocked Threads. People were definitely out to get lemmy.world in those comments for not making the same announcement.
This post about how lemmy.world had “bent the knee to corporations”? Yeah, that was a painful thread to read - the Fediverse is just getting started and already many of its users are keen to tear it apart in the pursuit of some kind of “purity.”
Let’s see how it goes. The developers are all on alert for any funny business, there’s no need to preemptively start blasting at shadows in every direction.
I was mostly talking about the direction the comments went in this post.
But yeah, there are multiple calls for .world to defed Threads. And I’m not really sure what that’s even supposed to prevent or accomplish.
OK, well, I’m not. The most I’ll do is start an account elsewhere. There’s not really a lot I can do about what other people say. All I can do is respond to comments that are in turn commenting on what I did say.
I’m also not saying ‘corporations bad’. I’m saying ‘corporations are unnecessary for the fediverse to exist and probably will do bad things’.
This means corporations bad tho. Which I agree with btw
A lot of people here seem to disagree with this point of view. Now I’m not a very smart guy but, I think you make good points and keeping profit motive out of the fediverse is a great idea. I can’t speak for anyone else but it’s the whole reason I joined lemmy in the first place (tho the whole reddit thing didn’t help) and ever since I’ve been transitioning to similar platforms for all my social media (mastodon, pixelfed, etc.).
Honestly my friend, if I was at all worried about people disagreeing with me I never would’ve got married.
Hahahahaha! Fair enough. ✌️& ❤️
Let’s face it Meta likes control. Control over your data, control over what you can and can’t say and control over nsfw. I don’t see meta truly wanting to federate due to lack of control. We all know how they feel about nsfw content and any speech that goes against thier ridiculous algorithms. I expect them to federate with as many instances as they can and cherry pick data. I doubt you’ll see half of the fediverse when viewing from threads.
“Wait and see” how much money Facebook is ready to put on the table?
Well, I’m not sure it’s anything as nefarious as that. I don’t think instance admins are hoping for a big payout from Zuck. BUt the fact that that idea exists as a possibility is both saddening and would be an impossibility with the fediverse as it is right now.
Payments are not entirely out of the picture. It’s already known that Meta had meetings with some Mastodon server admins.
Exactly which ones, I’m not sure, because I think they signed confidentiality agreements. We just know some of the ones that turned down the meetings.
I think at least Gargron / Eugen Rochko is, for a start, happy enough with the big attention his brand is getting and with the growth of Mastodon he’s hoping for. I have the feeling that he wants Mastodon to be recognized as one of the big players. We’ll see what comes next.
Noting wrong with hoping your software is successful - which to me, it is already - but when the cost outweighs the benefits, as it does in my opinion, that’s a price too high.
Yes that was the point I was trying to make. He is hoping for success and growth of his brand / software no matter at what costs this might come. Also I think it is very naive of him to believe that Mastodon would benefit of a cooperation with meta in the long run.
And in his hope for fame for his brand and his own instance he doesn’t seem to care for smaller instances or the fediverse in general and the other fediverse software.
They might not be waiting, but I can tell you that anyone is easily bought with the right amount.
I think you need to open your eyes as to the real reason why Threads exists. Instead of baseless claims, let’s use a source, shall we?
It’s obvious why Facebook would want to make a Twitter clone. But the Digital Markets Act is likely why that clone uses ActivityPub: https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/europe-fit-digital-age/digital-markets-act-ensuring-fair-and-open-digital-markets_en
Examples of the “do’s” - Gatekeeper platforms will have to:
- allow third parties to inter-operate with the gatekeeper’s own services in certain specific situations
- allow their business users to access the data that they generate in their use of the gatekeeper’s platform
- provide companies advertising on their platform with the tools and information necessary for advertisers and publishers to carry out their own independent verification of their advertisements hosted by the gatekeeper
- allow their business users to promote their offer and conclude contracts with their customers outside the gatekeeper’s platform
The interoperability is the big one. Being federated means that Threads isn’t considered a “gatekeeper platform”. I wouldn’t be surprised if Instagram and maybe even Facebook itself start to federate as well. Since Threads isn’t currently connected to the wider fediverse, that’s probably why they’re not in the EU yet - because it’s currently in violation of the Digital Markets Act.
This also means that fears of “Embrace, Extend, Extinguish” are likely overblown and FUD. Breaking ActivityPub interoperability means that they’d be a gatekeeper again and subject to EU regulations against gatekeepers.
I’m not saying Facebook is innocent. But I think people are so paranoid about things like EEE when there is clear evidence that EEE is not in Facebook’s best interest.
We want the fediverse to be a “normal” thing. Heck, we should get as many corporations as possible onboard, because then fears of EEE go out the window entirely. That’s how other protocols like Matter work - a bunch of corporations work with an open entity to decide collectively how the protocol should work.
And, if you pay attention, the web - and specifically Facebook - has been using open protocols like those for years without issue. Many of these open protocols the web uses were made by Facebook. Some examples:
- React.js
React is a JavaScript library that was created by Facebook.
It makes webpages pretty, basically. It makes things load really really fast while still looking clean and modern.
Dropbox, Paypal, Discord, Slack, Netflix, AirBnB all use React.
- HHVM
HHVM was created by Facebook.
HHVM is what executes the Hack programming language (also made by Facebook). Hack is based on PHP (the same thing Kbin runs on), but is optimized in a different way and is more flexible than traditional PHP.
Slack and Wikipedia are the biggest users of HHVM.
- Cassandra
Cassandra was created by Facebook.
Cassandra works basically as an alternative to MySQL. It does much of the same job, but works a bit better making sure there’s no single point of failure.
Uber, Netflix, Reddit, Spotify, and Twitter all use Cassandra.
- Apache Thrift
Thrift was created by Facebook.
It connects programs that were created using different programming languages. They can all share a data format through Thrift, which lets them talk to each other.
Thrift is used by Netflix, Evernote, Twitter, Uber, and reCAPTCHA.
Literally you could not use the modern web without using these technologies. I’m leaving 5-6 more out for space constraints. Meta has a loud voice in most of those techs, and outright controls a handful of them. That’s been the case for most of the 2010s into the 2020s.
I wouldn’t say I trust Facebook with the fediverse. But I’m also not so quick to jump to EEE because they do have a fairly solid track record when it comes to web tech.
And I don’t think “this isn’t a place for normies, normies go home!!!” is a winning proposition to make sure the fediverse becomes big enough that EEE isn’t an issue. We want widespread adoption. Smaller instances will always exist, and if that’s what you want you should join an explicitly small instance like Beehaw. Let the bigger instances federate and be federated with. Stop spreading baseless FUD.
Well, I don’t use any of those apps you just listed because, like Meta, they’re all privacy invading nightmares. And yet here I am using ‘the modern web’. If you genuinely believe they have a solid record when it comes to web tech then - well, you’re entitled to that opinion, but I don’t share it. I think they have an awful record, in that their tech works, but it doesn’t result in products that make the web better.
It’s hardly baseless FUD to suggest Meta might utilise EEE as a growth mechanism when they’ve actually participated in doing exactly that in the past.
And the reason Threads isn’t available in the EU is partly the reason you suggest but also in large part because of data privacy concerns. The EU knows full well that’s Meta’s business model. Hoover up peoples personal data and sell it on.
You also seem to be struggling with what EEE actually means. The ‘extend’ part of that entails rolling out a modified, non-standard version of the protocol which better serves their interests but is still technically able to federate with other systems. The ‘extinguish’ part is the years-later death of the original protocol.
“this isn’t a place for normies, normies go home!!!” - who suggested that? What I actually said was pretty much the opposite of that. I’d love to see open protocol based apps become standard. You, on the other hand, seem to want tighter and tighter ties between corporations and standards. That’s the kind of thinking the led to this absolute shit-show of data harvesting companies and ad-stuffed apps that’s currently the norm.
Not wanting to embrace a ‘growth at all costs, commercialism is our saviour’ attitude is not the same as saying ‘normies go home’.
Are you really saying you don’t use PayPal? I presume you have a job; your job probably uses Slack (or Teams) at the corporate level. You’re never streamed anything? You’re not coming from Reddit? You don’t use Wikipedia? Or Spotify? Or reCAPTCHA?
I most sincerely doubt that you’ve never used any of those, all of which run on tech that Facebook built and helps maintain. And I’m not even mentioning the countless small places that use things like React. I’m not joking when I say you literally cannot use the modern web without bumping into a website running React, which was - again - created by Facebook.
Maybe you think the things I mentioned are “apps” - they’re not, to be clear. They’re frameworks. You generally have no idea you’re using them, because it’s something that gets setup by the folks building the website. You don’t directly download React.js; you go to Discord.gg and Discord will download React to your machine and run it to display Discord. Same thing with Wikipedia - you go to Wikipedia, it uses HHVM to show you the page you want.
If you knew all that already and still think you don’t use tech run by Facebook, then your ignorance of how the web works is shocking.
I also think you’re struggling with the concept of “Meta doesn’t want the EU to come down on them.” They will never extend the network in a way that breaks apps, and they can’t extinguish it because both of those would make them “gatekeepers” under EU law - the thing they’re trying to avoid.
You have to understand that - as much as I dislike capitalism - it is what drives consumers. Linux is the better OS than Windows. That’s proven by basically everything running Linux… except consumer PCs, which are usually Macs or Windows. Because Linux doesn’t advertise itself like they do, not really.
The way for the fediverse to grow is to get corporations to embrace it. The more corporations that embrace it, the less likely it is that any individual corpo can extend/extinguish (assuming they ignore the EU for some reason). Corporations means regular users, and regular users means normalization, which means a healthy and growing fediverse.
Rather than trying to get a big place to reject this at all cost, maybe you should move to a small place like Beehaw that will more readily accept your worldview.
I don’t use PayPal, no. I don’t use Slack or Teams. I don’t use the Reddit app, I don’t use Twitter, I don’t use Spotify etc etc etc…really not sure whats difficult for you to grasp about any of that but feel free to doubt whatever you like. I know exactly what react is. I prefer to use vue myself. I use privacy respecting front ends for places like Wikipedia etc. I’m sure I’ve occasionally used something that’s powered by React but I try and avoid shitware generally.
You need to re-read what I wrote about EEE because you still don’t understand it. You also need to look into their history.
‘as much as I don’t like capitalism’ uh-huh, its obvious you loathe capitalism my friend, in the same way rampant closeted homophobes hate gay men.
Your point about Linux is facile and shows little to no understanding of the history of its development or why its ‘advertising’ is the way it is. Its the same reason you keep banging on about ‘embrace the corporations!’ - you just can’t fathom the idea of creating something out of love and enjoyment for people to use freely. That’s not success to you. Success isn’t success until it experiences uncontrolled growth, complete with marketing drives and shareholder options.
We have different viewpoints Elon. Move on.
“I know exactly what React is, I prefer to use Vue” shows you literally have zero clue what React is.
You don’t choose when you visit a website. There’s no option that says “render this with Vue.” It’s handled by the website itself. Lemmy uses Inferno instead of React, for example. You didn’t make that choice, and I highly doubt you chose Lemmy because researched that beforehand. And if you did, by going to Lemmy’s GitHub page… surprise! GitHub uses React!
I think you need to take a history lesson on the web. I gave multiple examples of tech Facebook has backed, and yet EEE hasn’t happened to any of them. There are more open techs that Facebook has contributed code to; a lot of Apache projects, for example. And yet no EEE. Curious. Also I noticed you’re avoiding the “EU will come down on Facebook if they get out of line” side of my argument. Also curious.
But I suppose that’s not a surprise. It’s clear you have no idea how things even work; you probably googled (oh, wait, you probably don’t use Google) “React replacement” to find Vue at all. You probably didn’t know Vue was created by a Google engineer and Google uses it internally. I suggest you change what web framework you use, if you have that magic button tucked away. Maybe switch to Inferno?
Not to mention you say you never used the Reddit app. I never said anything about the Reddit app. I was talking about the Reddit website. Unless you’ve never used the Reddit website, either? I trust you’re going to say you’ve never owned anything but a flip phone and do web searches with a phone book next.
You conclude by making a strawman and putting words in my mouth that I never said. You think if I loved corporations I would be here? But you’ve made multiple factual inaccuracies, you never source anything you say, you just constantly pout like the world is ending and try to force everyone else to do things your way.
But you’re right. We do have different viewpoints. I suggest you stop spreading yours as factual, or use that phone book to find sources.
(And for the record, I despise Elon.)
“shows you literally have zero clue what React is”
To develop stuff my friend. How did you not grasp that?
" surprise! GitHub uses React!"
Uh-huh and as I said, I’m sure I’ve used React occasionally I just tend to avoid it if possible.
“I think you need to take a history lesson on the web. I gave multiple examples of tech Facebook has backed, and yet EEE hasn’t happened to any of them.”
And yet, some it has. You seem unable to parse that.
“Also I noticed you’re avoiding the “EU will come down on Facebook if they get out of line” side of my argument. Also curious.”
Not quite what you said. You said the EU will penalise Meta if they don’t federate. All they have to do to avoid that is create a protocol that ensures they can technically achieve that, doesn’t have to be the actual ActivityPub protocol. That’s literally how EEE works. I avoided that so much I only mentioned it twice before.
'oh, wait, you probably don’t use Google) ’
True, I don’t. I use Whoogle. Open source, privacy respecting front end - I’d advise you check it out but you’d probably want to buy it because you think thats how open source software gets better.
‘You probably didn’t know Vue was created by a Google engineer and Google uses it internally’
No, I do know all that. Not really sure what difference any of that makes though.
'Not to mention you say you never used the Reddit app. I never said anything about the Reddit app. I was talking about the Reddit website. ’
Yep, I use the site. I check out the sub I mod using an open source, privacy respecting front end. If there’s anything untoward, I login via the site in a Firefox containerised tab with UBO enabled.
‘But you’ve made multiple factual inaccuracies’
Go right ahead and quote them.
‘you never source anything you say, you just constantly pout like the world is ending and try to force everyone else to do things your way.’
Well, sorry about all the pouting and I’m sorry to disappoint but I have no interest in forcing anyone to do anything. I say my piece, people can take it or leave it.
’ I suggest you stop spreading yours as factual,’
What have I stated as being factual that isn’t factual? Are you sure you’re not mixing up ‘having an opinion on what might happen’ with ‘claiming something as fact’?
‘(And for the record, I despise Elon.)’
Sorry Zuck, didn’t realise it was you.
👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏
