Adam Mosseri:

Second, threads posted by me and a few members of the Threads team will be available on other fediverse platforms like Mastodon starting this week. This test is a small but meaningful step towards making Threads interoperable with other apps using ActivityPub — we’re committed to doing this so that people can find community and engage with the content most relevant to them, no matter what app they use.

  • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    This perspective of “Either you agree with me or you’re complicit in a conspiracy against me” is incredibly childish and immature.

    Sometimes people have different opinions than you. Try to find a way to deal with it.

    • 1984@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      To me it’s like warning someone to not stand in the middle of the highway, and having some guy go “don’t tell me what to do, I have the right to disagree with you”.

      There are idiots in the world and their opinions are actually idiotic. :)

      It’s 100% super obvious that Meta wants to control the fediverse, and that’s why they are coming for it.

      • 🐝bownage [they/he]@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Can you explain how it’s 100% super obvious? I thought a popular platform with many users entering the fediverse might be good for exposure but it seems like the consensus here is that it’s actually bad. Help me understand how it’s bad?

        • smeg@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          1 year ago
          1. Most people using a service don’t want it to suddenly explode with new users who might not behave in the way that old users like
          2. Facebook don’t want to just be another instance and have a lovely time with everyone, at best they want to seek profit, and based on every other way they seek profit it will be by tightly controlling the experience, filling it with ads, and selling off user data (i.e. all things that most of us came here to escape from)

          In summary we know everything Facebook does is pretty evil, it’s “super obvious” that this will therefore be pretty evil too, right?

          • floofloof@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            selling off user data (i.e. all things that most of us came here to escape from)

            Since almost everything on the Fediverse is open for all to see, anyone can already be mining the data just by setting up their own instance of Lemmy or Mastodon. This might make it difficult to sell fediverse-generated data for profit.

            • smeg@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m sure they have a plan (otherwise they wouldn’t be doing it!), maybe it relies on using their app which also has your real name and phone number, maybe it’s for some legal loophole which means all fediverse users technically agree to their terms just by federating. I don’t know what they’re up to, but given their previous behaviour I think it’s safer not to even let them try!

              • jarfil@beehaw.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Maybe it’s to avoid getting hit by antitrust sanctions and some EU legislation:

                “Look, we’re open, we’re using the same ActivityPub protocol as thousands of others, our users can choose to leave whenever they want” - Meta, probably

                (…then 99% of their users proceed to DGAF and stay on Threads)

          • 🐝bownage [they/he]@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Ok yeah make sense! I’m definitely not a fan of Facebook’s and Meta’s data policies either.

            But how is anyone going to control a decentralised platform tho? What you’re describing seems like it would only apply to users on instances controlled by Meta, i.e. on threads itself. Or maybe I still don’t understand how the fediverse works.

            • smeg@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              One way I can think of is by being such a big player that they dominate and can thereby exert their will. For example, lemmy.world is the largest lemmy instance and we’ve seen a few communities on other instances dry up in favour of the ones on the big server. Now imagine that server is a hundred times bigger than the next largest and the people in charge have an active financial interest in moving people to their platform - if they play it carefully (and I’m sure they’ll be employing people to think about how to do this) they can shift the existing content into a place they can control it.

              • atocci@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                That doesn’t really apply to Lemmy’s content though, since unlike Lemmy.world, Threads users won’t be able to create /c/ communities. If a Threads user wants to post to a community in a way that Lemmy recognizes them, they’ll have to post it to one under a Lemmy instance’s control, or Lemmy users won’t see a thing.

                • smeg@feddit.uk
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  That was just an analogy, I believe Threads is targeting federation with Mastodon rather than Lemmy

    • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Normally and with very many other issues … I would agree with you … but on this issue I’m very adamant about what I see and believe.

      Think about it … Facebook is a billion dollar corporation and they show interest in your little world and the little things you are doing and they want to join you. This is a company that already has billions invested in systems that already have billions of users and millions of dollars of man power and technological resources. Why do they want to step into what we are doing here? Why do they feel a need to step into our space? Do they need more users? Do they need help from us?

      Big corporations are only interested in perpetual growth at all costs. They are also deathly afraid of competition or the potential of future competition. Look at the history of manufacturing, automotive corporations over the past hundred years … it’s a long history of the strong eating the weak.

      I agree my argument may sound childish or extreme but in this instance it’s pretty clear … if you let them in, it’s basically the beginning of the end for the fediverse.

      It’s the metaphorical Trojan Horse … once it’s inside and firmly established, everything will be lost.

      • JillyB@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why do they want to step into what we are doing here?

        I think there’s a much simpler explanation. Elon’s actions are causing users to want to leave the platform. Meta wants to pounce on this opportunity. ActivityPub is an established, open source protocol that allows Meta to quickly spin up a Twitter competitor. The federated nature means that Meta can reduce regulatory risk. At the same time, they can lobby for increased scrutiny of Twitter since it isn’t interroperable like Threads.

        I have no idea if this is actually how Meta is strategizing. But what I definitely know is that Meta absolutely doesn’t consider federated social media a threat. They aren’t trying to squash us. They’re aimed at Twitter. If they make some change that degrades the experience for us, absolutely we should consider defederation. Until then, let’s try to make some converts out of Threads users.

        • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s a type of squashing … they step in, take over, control it and the whole thing becomes something that is beyond our control and becomes another platform that is operated by a private corporation to manipulate and manage thought, content and private freedoms. Basically squashing the Fediverse that we originally wanted to exist.

          Once a major powerful corporation steps in and is given access … it’s like allowing a local gang member in your town to use your living room to deal drugs … at first you get some benefits but eventually, they’ll take over your house, throw you out and tell you go somewhere else because you don’t own the house any more, no matter what anyone says.

          • jarfil@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s not how the fediverse works, there is no obligation for any instance to federate with any other, and there are large groups of instances that block each other right now.

            Meta can’t throw anyone out of whatever instance they’re on, it’s just not possible.

            • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              yes not presently … but one an entity like Meta becomes the dominant system in this universe, eventually, they will build all the keys and controls to regulate it all … that’s the point when they will lock out whoever they want

              this is like the debate with climate change … no one really understands what’s going to happen in a few decades so we don’t care … when in reality, the time to do something about some future catastrophe is now … it’s the same thing with the fediverse, don’t allow big corporations in now, because we won’t be able to do anything about it later when they’ve overwhelmed everything.

              • jarfil@beehaw.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Meta becomes the dominant system

                Meta is already the dominant social network, and yet here we are. They can’t take that back, they can’t stop people from spinning up their own ActivityPub instances (if you don’t know how, go to YounoHost and do it the simple way), Meta can’t stop these instances from communicating among themselves in any way their owners see fit.

                Sure, Meta can lock out whoever they want out of Threads… but that’s the status quo already: the whole fediverse is currently “locked out” from Threads, they can’t lock it out any more.

                As for climate change, the time to do something was over 125 years ago… so yeah, that boat has sailed many many times over:

                https://blogs.bl.uk/science/2016/12/the-first-paper-on-carbon-dioxide-and-global-warming.html

    • floofloof@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Sometimes people have different opinions than you.

      They’re saying that those opinions are naïve.