I still haven't made up my mind about blocking Meta's #Threads, codenamed #Project92 or #P92, supposedly supporting #ActivityPub, should it actually launch. As far as I can see, it's basically "keeping the evil surveillance corp. out" vs "avoiding nerdy self-marginalization".
Both are fair points. I guess, it depends. But on what? For me, the key point is if Threads (or whatever its name) supports easy migration (as Mastodon does). If that's the case, I would prefer not to block it, as it could be an offramp from the walled garden. If this feature is omitted, then I would be much more open to blocking.
But in the end, this should not be a decision by the admins, but a collective one by the users of the instance. #fedipact#Project92
I'm changing my stance on the whole Meta/project92 thing after reading this article. I think the entire* fediverse should block project92 by default. Later, some instances can re-evaluate whether to maintain those blocks, once we have a better idea of what the benefits and consequences of federating will be:...
I also think fear-mongering won't help. There is little we can change about it. Let instances decide for themselves to defederate or not.
Yes, there is a risk Meta applies the "EEE" strategy. We shouldn't be naive about that. But why would you stay on an ad-ridden Meta ActivityPub server if you see there are friendly, ad-free Activity servers on Mastodon and the likes?
For a more positive view and an interesting read on the matter, I recommend:
The #Fediverse needs to learn some serious conflict resolution...
If we ever aspire to become a serious alternative to corporate platforms we can't continue with this behavior. Let me explain.
Two days ago someone created a "The_Donald" community of a well-known #Lemmy instance. Immediately there were cries for defederation, blocking, and suspicion about the admin letting racists run rampant on his instance.
Ultimately when the admin logged in they removed that community. But before they even had time to realize what was happening they were already being accused of stuff and if any instance heeded the call to block, it would have caused damage to the users who would have their subscriptions / follows severed.
Some users who've just arrived from Reddit and bring a fresh perspective are already wary of the shit show this can become.
That instance resisted massive blocks because it was large enough. But what if it was smaller? >>
This blog post by Ploum, who was part of the original XMPP efforts long ago, describes how Google killed one great federated service, which shows why the Fediverse must not give Meta the chance
@jherazob I care more about the effects than intent in this case.
#Meta's #Threads / #Barcelona / #Project92 doesn't have the ability to do anything actually negative to the #Fediverse except potentially overload small instances with a flood of traffic.
I don't get the fearmongering; lots of talk about "breaking the #Fediverse" coming from people who aren't really doing a good job of articulating how exactly a new #Fediverse software--because that's all this is at the end of the day--will break an entire network of software that already works with each other.
> Lemmy is small so it gets more feature requests than it can code up.
Why? From who? Are a lot of #Meta users who are on #Project92 / #Barcelona / #Threadsreally going to be submitting feature requests for a software that they don't use?
> Meta comes in and looks at the most requested feature that’s been put on lemmy's backlog. Let’s say it’s some mod tool. Maybe even AI mod tool that sorts comments based on sentiment analysis.
What are the chances that this is something so significant that people would be willing to switch software over it?
> use lemmy and face flood of trolls in their communities
Where are these users coming from? This is already a problem on the #Fediverse, and we already know how to deal with it.
This scenario you're pitching seems wildly implausible.
With the upcoming #meta#Project92 Fediverse service, there has been a, well, robust discussion of how to avoid threats looming. Those advocating mass-preemptive defederation make three cases for it.
➡️ To avoid data mining ...which Defederation does virtually zero to avoid any big tech entity scraping all the fedi public social graph today - Want proof?
see: https://is.gd/q8U2pv
The next argument is about poorly moderated P92 user posts and ad spam.
Which I'll discuss next.
Should the Fediverse welcome its new surveillance-capitalism overlords? Opinions differ! (privacy.thenexus.today)
I'm changing my stance on the whole Meta/project92 thing after reading this article. I think the entire* fediverse should block project92 by default. Later, some instances can re-evaluate whether to maintain those blocks, once we have a better idea of what the benefits and consequences of federating will be:...
How to Kill a Decentralised Network (such as the Fediverse) (ploum.net)
This blog post by Ploum, who was part of the original XMPP efforts long ago, describes how Google killed one great federated service, which shows why the Fediverse must not give Meta the chance