• @theDoctor
    15•1 year ago

    I guess everyone else replying to you doesn’t get what you are saying.

    They aren’t threatening to leave like it matters. They are expressing concern that preemptively defederating with anyone that hasn’t blocked Meta/Facebook/Threads/Insert_Bad_Actor_Here is a horrible idea.

    No one is saying that we shouldn’t defederate with Meta. We are saying not to make the mistake of fracturing a community that, in internet terms, is in its infancy.

    I’m willing to bet most people here don’t like being told that they can’t do something for arbitrary reasons. So why would you care what another instance is doing? If you don’t like your instance, move. If you don’t like another instance personally, block them.

    Defederation is a powerful tool when necessary. It can block toxic communities, stop raids, and remove spam centers. But defederating by association is a drastic step.

    Edit: And the comment of

    this is the kind of stuff that makes me … say “Screw it. … I guess I’ll sign up at Threads” Has no one responding seen all the posts by people confused about Lemmy as is?

    You know how you kill Lemmy, fracture it and make it so difficult to find/understand that the general populace, not early adopters, not techies, normal people give up.

    So if you want this content you have to go here, but they won’t talk to this other place, so if you want that stuff you should get another account and go over here… oh and these guys won’t talk to anyone so you will need another account for them.

    And where will they go? Maybe a place run by a company that they already use. With a shiny new app… AND 30 MILLION PEOPLE that already have it.

    Congratulations, in your attempt to kill Meta you have just alienated the vast majority of potential users and sent them straight to that which you were trying to destroy.

    • @norb@infosec.pub
      17•1 year ago

      “Insert_Bad_Actor” is so widely vague that it can apply anywhere to anyone (slippery slope, I know, but this entire discussion hinges on some application of the principle).

      Two months ago the rallying cry for federation/fediverse was “YOU CAN CONTROL IT” which very quickly has morphed into “YOU CAN CONTROL IT AS LONG AS YOU FIT IN THIS PARTICULAR BOX.” A lot of this feels like it’s coming from a place of fear, which is not a great place to make informed and logical decisions from.

      A lot of the discussion I’ve seen here and on Mastodon around Meta/Threads/federating with a corporate entity seems to be circling around three issues.

      1. Privacy. There is an assumption that as soon as Meta gets it’s fingers into the metaverse pie they’ll hoover up everything they can. My question to anyone that thinks this is, “How do you know they don’t do it already?” Meta can very easily have a server setup somewhere to pull in ActivityPub information. IT’S THE ENTIRE POINT OF FEDERATION. You can’t stop them, other than to block the instance. So unless someone figures out that Meta is running a particular instance and then announces it so that admins can block it, it’s reasonable to assume it’s already happening. This just means what you post already isn’t private, and never should be assumed to be.

      2. Ads. Somehow people think that Meta will abuse federation to sells ads to send out as posts. Which, if they do that, they will be quickly blocked and they’ve just ruined their new crop of eyeballs. On top of that, sending ads out into the void to end up next to god knows what content, on god knows what server, in front of god knows who, is not something that most ad buyers are going to spend money on. Any ad buyers want to know that they are getting value for their spend.

      3. EEE, or Embrace Extend Extinguish. This is to me the most valid argument for keeping them at arm’s length. The basic premise is that these huge corps can spend the money up front to build on top of an open standard, add improvements that will be limited to only their version, then once they have the market share/cornered pull the rug out by either defederating and hurting the whole thing, or by locking users in to their “better” service. This has happened a number of times in the past, and Facebook has been guilty of it themselves.

      Whatever happens with this in the future will be interesting to watch unfold, that’s for sure. But doing anything before the service even has the hooks to connect in and federate seem so premature to me.

      • @theDoctor
        7•1 year ago

        You hit the nail on the head.

        I purposefully went vague because this won’t be the last. There will always be decisions that need to be made. There will always be a new company looking for a payday.

        And if we are going to say, don’t just ‘Defederate from Meta’, but also ‘Defederate with anyone who hasn’t defederated from Meta too!’ then we have one very steep and slippery slope indeed.

      • @thathoe@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        6•1 year ago

        100% agreed on just about everything. I don’t think EEE is even a good argument (I’d love to entertain strong arguments otherwise!) - kerberos seems like the best related example, but that’s not even very applicable, and I don’t think XMPP even was subject to EEE (here’s a longer response on that: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/708874 )