Welcome to the fediverse: Your guide to Mastodon, Threads, Bluesky and more | TechCrunch
techcrunch.com
What is the fediverse? Here's everything you need to know about Mastodon, Threads, Bluesky and others.

Once upon a time, in a galaxy not so far away (this one, in fact), a few internet rebels decided that they were tired of the corporate overlords controlling their online lives. Thus, the fediverse was born — an attempt to wrest control of microblogging services, such as Twitter and its ilk, away from centralized powers and into the hands of the people.

    • deweydecibel@lemmy.worldEnglish
      12·
      6 months ago

      Not just include it, they describe the Fediverse, right up front, as an escape from corporate controlled spaces, and without a hint of fucking irony, drops Threads as the second “big name”.

  • Undearius@lemmy.caEnglish
    12·
    6 months ago

    Since then, myriad decentralized platforms have sprouted, including […] Threads

    How many Threads instances are there?

    I don’t think they know what “decentralized” means

  • ssm@lemmy.sdf.org
    62·
    6 months ago

    the fediverse was born — an attempt to wrest control of microblogging services, such as Twitter and its ilk, away from centralized powers and into the hands of the people.

    Threads is Meta’s runner in the fediverse race. It uses the ActivityPub protocol, which lets Threads fly the platform interoperability flag the fediverse is known for – although Meta has received some criticism for being slow to fully participate. Still, with the weight of Meta behind it, Threads positions itself as a key player in the evolution of a more connected and diverse online ecosystem.

    shut the fuck up, go commit retroactive abortion

  • BrikoX@lemmy.zipOPMEnglish
    41·
    6 months ago

    I know there are strong feelings about posts that include Threads and to lesser extent Bluesky, but it’s important to know what corporate media thinks of Fediverse and how they compare it to corporate alternatives. You are encouraged to dissect the article and point out all of its failures, or just downvote the post and move on. But I won’t be removing it.

    P.S. The author of the article definitely has a pro VC stance.