Why Defederating from Facebook/Meta is So Important

I strongly encourage instance admins to defederate from Facebook/Threads/Meta.

They aren’t some new, bright-eyed group with no track record. They’re a borderline Machiavellian megacorporation with a long and continuing history of extremely hostile actions:

  • Helping enhance genocides in countries
  • Openly and willingly taking part in political manipulation (see Cambridge Analytica)
  • Actively have campaigned against net neutrality and attempted to make “facebook” most of the internet for members of countries with weaker internet infra - directly contributing to their amplification of genocide (see the genocide link for info)
  • Using their users as non-consenting subjects to psychological experiments.
  • Absolutely ludicrous invasions of privacy - even if they aren’t able to do this directly to the Fediverse, it illustrates their attitude.
  • Even now, they’re on-record of attempting to get instance admins to do backdoor discussions and sign NDAs.

Yes, I know one of the Mastodon folks have said they’re not worried. Frankly, I think they’re being laughably naive >.<. Facebook/Meta - and Instagram’s CEO - might say pretty words - but words are cheap and from a known-hostile entity like Meta/Facebook they are almost certainly just a manipulation strategy.

In my view, they should be discarded as entirely irrelevant, or viewed as deliberate lies, given their continued atrocious behaviour and open manipulation of vast swathes of the population.

Facebook have large amounts of experience on how to attack and astroturf social media communities - hell I would be very unsurprised if they are already doing it, but it’s difficult to say without solid evidence ^.^

Why should we believe anything they say, ever? Why should we believe they aren’t just trying to destroy a competitor before it gets going properly, or worse, turn it into yet another arm of their sprawling network of services, via Embrace, Extend, Extinguish - or perhaps Embrace, Extend, Consume would be a better term in this case?

When will we ever learn that openly-manipulative, openly-assimilationist corporations need to be shoved out before they can gain any foothold and subsume our network and relegate it to the annals of history?

I’ve seen plenty of arguments claiming that it’s “anti-open-source” to defederate, or that it means we aren’t “resilient”, which is wrong ^.^:

  • Open source isn’t about blindly trusting every organisation that participates in a network, especially not one which is known-hostile. Threads can start their own ActivityPub network if they really want or implement the protocol for themselves. It doesn’t mean we lose the right to kick them out of most - or all - of our instances ^.^.
  • Defederation is part of how the fediverse is resilient. It is the immune system of the network against hostile actors (it can be used in other ways, too, of course). Facebook, I think, is a textbook example of a hostile actor, and has such an unimaginably bad record that anything they say should be treated as a form of manipulation.

Edit 1 - Some More Arguments

In this thread, I’ve seen some more arguments about Meta/FB federation:

  • Defederation doesn’t stop them from receiving our public content:
    • This is true, but very incomplete. The content you post is public, but what Meta/Facebook is really after is having their users interact with content. Defederation prevents this.
  • Federation will attract more users:
    • Only if Threads makes it trivial to move/make accounts on other instances, and makes the fact it’s a federation clear to the users, and doesn’t end up hosting most communities by sheer mass or outright manipulation.
    • Given that Threads as a platform is not open source - you can’t host your own “Threads Server” instance - and presumably their app only works with the Threads Server that they run - this is very unlikely. Unless they also make Threads a Mastodon/Calckey/KBin/etc. client.
    • Therefore, their app is probably intending to make itself their user’s primary interaction method for the Fediverse, while also making sure that any attempt to migrate off is met with unfamiliar interfaces because no-one else can host a server that can interface with it.
    • Ergo, they want to strongly incentivize people to stay within their walled garden version of the Fediverse by ensuring the rest remains unfamiliar - breaking the momentum of the current movement towards it. ^.^
  • We just need to create “better” front ends:
    • This is a good long-term strategy, because of the cycle of enshittification.
    • Facebook/Meta has far more resources than us to improve the “slickness” of their clients at this time. Until the fediverse grows more, and while they aren’t yet under immediate pressure to make their app profitable via enshittification and advertising, we won’t manage >.<
    • This also assumes that Facebook/Meta won’t engage in efforts to make this harder e.g. Embrace, Extend, Extinguish/Consume, or social manipulation attempts.
    • Therefore we should defederate and still keep working on making improvements. This strategy of “better clients” is only viable in combination with defederation.

https://infosec.pub/comment/653611 (post got too long!)

A digital speedpainting. A giant reaper with a golden chain around their neck with the logo of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp and a headband with the meta logo. The giant silhouette surprise a tiny group in comparison; a warm scene of small cute characters gathered around a Fediverse glowing logo. This is the mascott of Mastodon, Pleroma, Misskey, Funkwhale, Lemmy, Peertube.

This is my feelings in reference to the discussions about Meta joining the Fediverse...

License: CC-By 
(except logo of Meta/Facebook/What'sApp and Instagram, under trademarks)
zephyroths,

I’m really out of touch here. So, Meta is joining the fediverse?

JeffCraig,

No, there’s no indication that Meta cares about the Fediverse.

This is all just a bunch of hype. Yes, of course we’ll defederate if they try. I think that’s fairly obvious.

sapient_cogbag,
@sapient_cogbag@infosec.pub avatar

Given some of the naive stuff I’ve seen from some of the mastodon community leaders, I’d be more worried. And there is indication that Meta/FB cares (not in a good way) about Fedi, since they’ve been in meetings with instance admins ^.^

throws_lemy,
@throws_lemy@lemmy.nz avatar

Really disappointing with what Rochko said about Threads on the mastodon blog, no wonder there are rumors about Meta paying some mastodon admins

pentobarbital,

Meta created Threads, a microblogging platform (basically a Twitter clone) that you use with your Instagram account. They’ve stated that in the future, Threads will be able to federate with other ActivityPub platforms.

LlamaLover,

Thank you, I had the same notion as OP. I heard that “something” was up, but could not put my finger on it. Your summary nailed it.

Wahots,
@Wahots@pawb.social avatar

Them federating and keeping open federatation a la reddit with their 3rd party apps has a snowballs chance in hell. That’s data they won’t be fully getting. And Facebook and mark are addicted to data like digital fentanyl with tranq mixed in. They’ll do anything to get their fix.

sapient_cogbag,
@sapient_cogbag@infosec.pub avatar

Not if we work together and most of us defederate from them.

throws_lemy,
@throws_lemy@lemmy.nz avatar

Meta is also a threat to the privacy of fediverse users

Ross Schulman, senior fellow for decentralization at digital rights nonprofit the Electronic Frontier Foundation, notes that if Threads emerges as a massive player in the fediverse, there could be concerns about what he calls “social graph slurping." Meta will know who all of its users interact with and follow within Threads, and it will also be able to see who its users follow in the broader fediverse. And if Threads builds up anywhere near the reach of other Meta platforms, just this little slice of life would give the company a fairly expansive view of interactions beyond its borders.

wired.com/…/meta-threads-privacy-decentralization…

flatplutosociety,
@flatplutosociety@lemmy.world avatar

This is a legit concern and a very good reason to not federate with Meta, but I never want to see the phrase “social graph slurping” again.

cybersandwich,

And they can’t do this now??? Everything is posted publicly.

Sturgist,
@Sturgist@lemmy.ca avatar
KeefChief13,

I support defederation

JoYo,
@JoYo@lemmy.ml avatar

threads will never federate.

dystop,
@dystop@lemmy.world avatar

Everyone here talking about XMPP and EEE.

https://i.imgflip.com/7rt9zi.jpg

masterspace,

Original arguments against federation:

Don’t federate with Meta, they’ll come in and syphon away our dozens of users!

Current arguments against federation:

Don’t federate with Meta, they’ll come in and flood us with too many users!

Honestly, the hysteria in these threads is ridiculous. Meta doesn’t care about the handful of Mastodon users and never did, the project just sounded cooler to higher ups when it was pitched as web3 /decentral project.

ZagTheRaccoon,

The problem isn’t their intentions, the problem is the moment they join they will have more power and leverage in this space than any other instance. As well as become a magnet for hosting most of the content. Which they will eventually wall off, and when they wall it off people will choose them over federation because they got used to them.

masterspace,

As well as become a magnet for hosting most of the content

How and why would people go from posting in communities organized around topics like Lemmy to posting to their followers like Threads?

Everyone needs to stop hand waving around the fact that they’re big and start thinking through whether they even could do anything to harm the fediverse given it’s technical design. As far as I can tell no one has been able to give any concrete examples of ways they would harm Lemmy / KBin’s growth.

MarioBarisa,
@MarioBarisa@vlemmy.net avatar

I think that this is the best take on this topic

sapient_cogbag,
@sapient_cogbag@infosec.pub avatar

That basically starts us playing the losing game of “more users at amy cost”. We will not win and it is comically naive to think so.

Read my post.

FreddyNO,
@FreddyNO@lemmy.world avatar

Absolutely agree, cut them off.

DarthRedLeader,

I feel like defederating is a good short term solution, but the events described with XMPP could have happened in any number of ways.

The real focus should be on how to make ActivityPub robust enough to prevent the events from the article from happening again.

NutWrench,
@NutWrench@lemmy.world avatar

Agreed. It’s not cowardly or “anti-competitive” to choose to avoid stepping in crap. Because that’s what Facebook and Twitter are. Single ownership of an entire social media is a terrible idea, because that platform will always be promoting and protecting the interests of its owners, not its users.

FlashMobOfOne,
@FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world avatar

Exactly.

I’m not sure why anyone would look at Facebook at this point and not think they’re coming to manipulate and destroy external platforms.

Bubs,
@Bubs@lemmy.world avatar

Well maybe it is anti-competitve, but anyway competition is what leads to shady tactics like meta are using. The point of the fediverse is cooperation, and absolutely avoid competition

sxan,
@sxan@midwest.social avatar

Coincidentally, I just read an article about the impact large players can have on a financial market when they create a new ETF. The article went into some detail about the various ways the market can be manipulated, and also the unintentional influences the mere presence of a new, huge, monolithic owner of a large share of a commodity can have. It’s rarely a positive event for the smaller players.

There are similarities between financial markets and social media spaces, and social media should take heed from the lessons offered by the much older financial space. Unlike financial markets, the ActivityPub sphere has controls small players can exercise to counter movements like Threads. How effective they are remains to be seen, but I think you’re absolutely right: the existing AP players would be better served by locking out Meta, than to allow the wolf into the playground.

Spam,
@Spam@lemmy.world avatar

Wouldn’t mind perusing that if you have the link handy still.

sxan,
@sxan@midwest.social avatar

I do, but it’s a crypto currency market essay with a ton of ads. And blockchain is persona non grata.

Ah, heck. Why not; just… caveat lector: bitcoinmagazine.com/…/the-arrival-of-blackrock-bi…

Fizz,
@Fizz@lemmy.nz avatar

I’d like to go against the grain and be against defederating. I have so many friends who couldnt give less of a fuck about this stuff and because I care I am forced to isolate myself from all their mainstream services. I would love for once to be able to see the same posts they see and share stuff with them and maybe show them that its not so bad over here.

TooLameForLemmy,

What about when the communities get so intertwined, then Meta starts trying to impose their rules on those outside communities? If lemmy.world chooses to federate with Threads and they do the same, it’s only a matter of time before their rules become our rules or lemmy.world gets the boot. If they don’t adopt them, it’s safe to assume the lemmy.world userbase would leave for Threads after having been a part of it for some time.

Zaktor,

My expectation is that Threads will be too permissive with rules rather than too strict. They’re pretty happy to have LibsOfTikTok on there so they can make money from the stochastic terrorism. The problem I see is that their size means defederation for insufficient moderation isn’t a real threat, so federating instances are stuck with per-user moderation and will be overwhelmed with Threads trolls.

I suppose it ends up being “their rules are our rules”, but in a “there are no rules and you’ll accept it” sort of way, rather than “adhere to our community standards or we’ll take away 90% of your users”.

TooLameForLemmy,

My expectation is that Threads will be too permissive with rules rather than too strict. They’re pretty happy to have LibsOfTikTok on there so they can make money from the stochastic terrorism.

I can see that being an issue until they want to monetize it with advertisers. I imagine they’re crack down harder, although still not hard enough, on the hate speech and misinformation at that point. At which point the rules they impose become the rules every other instance that federates with them has to impose or risk being ostracized. This is speculation of course but I cannot imagine a scenario where they 1) don’t monetize the platform and 2) those advertisers are cool with their ads being right above a post, from a different instance that cannot be moderated by Threads admins, that show users how to pirate that same content.

I suppose it ends up being “their rules are our rules”, but in a “there are no rules and you’ll accept it” sort of way, rather than “adhere to our community standards or we’ll take away 90% of your users”.

Either one is not good for the Fediverse but now you definitely have me questioning which one it will be. I really appreciate you bringing that point up as I really hadn’t considered it at all.

ruck_feddit,

OP stated Meta/Threads users would still be able to see posts, but they wouldn’t be able to interact. If M/T were an unbiased player, they could easily allow Lemmy users to interact on Threads with their Lemmy accounts (not giving any of your personal info over to Meta), but we all know that won’t happen.

I can’t see a positive reason to invite the weasel into the chicken coop

sapient_cogbag,
@sapient_cogbag@infosec.pub avatar

… you can still spin up your own instance if you really want to expose yourself to facebook’s social manipulation? Or you could make an account on there.

But you can also show people it’s fine over here by posting links, talking about it, sharing lemmy memes, etc.

Letting them in on any large scale is a losing proposition, as explained in my Original Post ^.^

legion,

Yep lol. This is tinfoil hat shit. Meta is evil but they’re using ActivityPub now, deal with it. People wanted the protocol to be popular, and now it is. You got what you wished for!

Welcome to the popular kids’ club now.

donut4ever, (edited )
@donut4ever@lemmy.world avatar

I’ve already blocked threads on mastodon. Just waiting to find out how to block their shit here on Lemmg Lemmy, too. IF they’re already here or coming soon.

jennwiththesea,
@jennwiththesea@lemmy.world avatar

They’re not here yet. I’m actually not sure they’re on Mastodon yet, either. They delayed federation implementation.

donut4ever,
@donut4ever@lemmy.world avatar

It took off so quick. Fucking people are sheep, man. I’m absolutely apauled at how many people just ran to it WITH all the shit it asks to collect.

Toad_the_Fungus,

the cattle follow their idol celebrities and influencers, because they can't break off their parasocial relationships no matter the consequences

donut4ever,
@donut4ever@lemmy.world avatar

You got that right. People are just blind and it is sad.

ToastyMedic,

For what it’s worth, I’d like to put my voice. Out here in support of defederating them.

Our goals and their goals are like parallel Lines, They’ll never cross.

Maggi_Man,

Going in 180degrees different directions

weedazz,

Tl:Dr the only federation we join should have Jean luc Picard in it not Mark Zuckerberg

chrundle,
@chrundle@lemmy.world avatar

Is Zuckerberg Borg then?
We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own instance”.

troublecat,
@troublecat@lemmy.world avatar

Zuckerborg

MisterD,

If You look at pictures of him in Congress testifying, he looks like a robot

ComptitiveSubset,

OP is correct. We have very little to to gain and everything to lose.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • uselessserver093
  • Food
  • aaaaaaacccccccce
  • [email protected]
  • test
  • CafeMeta
  • testmag
  • MUD
  • RhythmGameZone
  • RSS
  • dabs
  • Socialism
  • KbinCafe
  • TheResearchGuardian
  • Ask_kbincafe
  • oklahoma
  • feritale
  • SuperSentai
  • KamenRider
  • All magazines