1319

Meta just announced that they are trying to integrate Threads with ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, etc.). We need to defederate them if we want to avoid them pushing their crap into fediverse.

If you're a server admin, please defederate Meta's domain "threads.net"

If you don't run your own server, please ask your server admin to defederate "threads.net".

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] mtcerio@lemmy.world 30 points 11 months ago

Aside from the "moral" argument, can someone ELI5 what harm can a federated threads.net do on other users (like me) and/or instances?

[-] bort@feddit.de 55 points 11 months ago

the general strategie is called "embrace, extend, extinguish". This strat is the reason, why everyone uses MS Office today

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish

[-] SulaymanF@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

As opposed to Threads stealing all brands companies and users anyway?

There’s still advantages to a fediverse and ways to defend against “embrace extend extinguish” if you plan ahead.

We can’t complain about proprietary networks if we don’t allow others to join our own open ones.

[-] bort@feddit.de 12 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

As opposed to Threads stealing all brands companies and users anyway?

The extend-phase is when people migrate to threads, who would have stayed otherwise.

[-] Eldritch@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

You think groups that came here largely fleeing Reddit and Twitter are going to be tempted to go to threads? I doubt it very heavily. Threads is more likely to loose people to here if anything.

[-] money_loo@1337lemmy.com 2 points 11 months ago

Why are people not allowed to do that if they want to?

[-] xigoi@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 11 months ago

And why would you expect there to be many such people? I’d assume the intersection of people who like the Fediverse and people who like proprietary social media to be pretty small.

[-] Hadriscus@lemm.ee 11 points 11 months ago

that reminds me of Apple with iMessage

[-] pascal@lemm.ee 4 points 11 months ago

A failed messaging system that nobody in the world uses except for the Americans?

How sweet.

[-] Hadriscus@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago

Well, yes, I think that's the one.

[-] DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 11 months ago

I think you upset the americans 😆

[-] ttmrichter@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

I'm not American and I still downvoted the asshole. Sorry. Assholes.

[-] pascal@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago

That's absolutely in your right to do so.

Would you mind if I ask you what did I say that's considered an asshole move?

[-] Hadriscus@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago

I'm not following... who is american and who is an asshole

[-] OriginalUsername7@lemmy.world 38 points 11 months ago

It's not necessarily about a threat to instances or users. It's more an issue with how Meta could potentially hijack the protocol the whole thing is built on, and do damage in the long run. There's a write up here on how similar things have happened in the past;

https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html

[-] LinkOpensChest_wav@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

This is what it's about, right here. I wish more people would understand this. This is not some loose anti-coporate sentiment or senseless alarm sounding. We have example after example of how corporations like Meta, Microsoft, and Google leverage their power to consume and destroy. To say "we just need to be proactive about stopping them" is naive. We've said that so many times, and every time we've lost.

The only way to win is not to play their game. We can't let them in in the first place.

Edit: a word

[-] Cavemanfreak@lemm.ee 31 points 11 months ago

You should look into Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. I think the biggest fear is that they have so many users that they will just flood all instances with their stuff. This can, in time, lead to a situation where they can defederate from everything else and bring a lot of people with them, since most of the content will have come from Threads.

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 4 points 11 months ago

I feel though that if they were going to do that they should have done that from the beginning. A lot of the other instances now they kind of solidified themselves as big players. It would have been easy to just use Threads at the start but people have put the effort into creating accounts on other platforms now, I can't see them going back what would be the point it would be more of it again.

[-] flappy@lemm.ee 7 points 11 months ago

No, you need some fire before you can extinguish.

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 11 months ago

So that plan at this point seems to be as far as I can understand it to be to register to a service wherever every single other user will be federate from them.

I'm sure that will work brilliantly.

[-] ttmrichter@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

… solidified themselves as big players …

You understand that the entire fediverse is a rounding error against Meta's user base, right?

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

No one's going to drop thir instance to use Meta. The whole reason that most of the people are here is because they don't trust the big sites.

[-] ttmrichter@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

You are missing the point. And by this point I'm pretty sure you're doing so wilfully.

[-] witx@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago

They can absorb large numbers of users and communities and after a while close themselves to the outside. Meaning that once people "need" those communities they'll have no chance other than go threads.

[-] mtcerio@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

I got a number of answers that sound very weak to me, and basically point to a "fail" of the fediverse in its own nature if threads joins. Kind of disappointing.

To me, the key idea of the fediverse is that it's federated and should work as a whole, no matter who joins. Most of the answers below support the opposite. They are basically saying that the fediverse should stay within the "fediverse", which is exactly what non-federated social media are doing. Meh.

[-] sour@kbin.social 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

threads hab more users than fediverse on one instance

is cause centralization

this post was submitted on 16 Dec 2023
1319 points (100.0% liked)

Fediverse

28352 readers
417 users here now

A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).

If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!

Rules

Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration), Search Lemmy

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS