1244
submitted 1 year ago by vantablack to c/technology@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] corbin@infosec.pub 72 points 1 year ago

FOSS bros: we’re all about user choice!

also FOSS bros: no not like that

[-] shrugal@lemm.ee 66 points 1 year ago

It's pretty logical actually: The advocates of openness must be closed to one thing, and that is whatever aims to destroy openness itself.

[-] whereisk@lemmy.world 46 points 1 year ago

This is like inviting the Catholic church in an institution specifically built to protect former victims of same and similar institutions.

Given that anyone can start an instance and federate with Threads, or join an instance that does, freedom of choice is unaffected.

[-] krimsonbun 31 points 1 year ago

We just don't want history repeating itself like what happened with xmpp. Do you really think facebook of all companies is joining the fediverse with good intentions? Do you really think they're not trying to monopolize this?

[-] MostlyHarmless@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago

I would like to point out that xmpp still exists. Google Talk does not. WhatsApp killed xmpp, not Google

[-] squeakycat@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

XMPP still exists - and I use it for chatting with one person. Nobody I know uses it. Techies I know use IRC and, more recently, Matrix. Or discord, disappointingly enough.

And I mention techies because the rest of the world is just happy with WhatsApp/Messenger/Slack et al.

What I'm getting at is that XMPP feels pretty dead in my experience. But who knows, maybe it would be in this same position regardless of Google like you allude to.

[-] prole@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago

Where did they even mention Google in their comment?

[-] MostlyHarmless@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

Because every time this argument starts, someone mentions how they don't want the fediverse to go down the xmpp path, and the argument has its origin in this article

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

[-] krimsonbun 3 points 1 year ago

I never mentioned google. And sure, xmpp exists but it's dead and would be much better off if not for big tech giants

[-] rglullis@communick.news 4 points 1 year ago

Last I checked, the people using XMPP are still running happily using servers and clients.

All 17 of them.

[-] theterrasque@infosec.pub 2 points 1 year ago

I gotta ask.. were you around and actively using xmpp around that time?

Because I was. And xmpp struggling had nothing to do with Google

[-] halm@leminal.space 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You're downplaying your own part, in between those two statements.

Internet rando: "I choose to enable this corporate, repeat privacy offender in strongarming its way into the open, federated web"

Edit: spelling

[-] MostlyHarmless@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago

How is Threads going to breach your privacy by federating with your instance? How is de federating from Threads going to protect your privacy?

[-] prole@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 year ago

Do you think this is Threads' final form? Embrace, extend, extinguish. This is what corporations do. Everything is a zero sum game in their minds, and they will act in the best interest of shareholders. That shit has no business here.

[-] MostlyHarmless@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago

Yeah, yeah, parrot the line and then please explain how?

Extending means making extra functionality that others haven't implemented, so that your offering is more attractive. You use it to build a walled garden. Defederation just skips that step and does it for them. They don't even have to extend.

[-] prole@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago

You missed the point of my comment. I don't need to explain how, I'm sure they've got brilliant engineers working hard on it. This is just how capitalism works, Meta isn't a benevolent force here, their ultimate goal is to make money off users and their data.

I don't need to figure out exactly how they will do it to know that they will.

[-] MostlyHarmless@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago

Ah, so just fear mongering and hoping that the fear based knee-jerk reaction isn't actually playing directly into their hands.

[-] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago

Dude, Meta has a terrible track record. They've shown us time and time again that they are outright evil. Why would it be different this time?

What's the saying? "When someone shows you who their are, trust them the first time"

In this instance, Meta has shown time and time again who they are and you still believe they will do something right.

[-] MostlyHarmless@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago

I'm not saying it's different. I'm saying that the current plan in no achieves the goal of keeping the fediverse open and out of the control of large corporations.

If you want to know how to prevent them from taking control, you better start working out the specifics of how they will do that. Otherwise your actions may end up helping them.

No one seems to have considered the possibility that Facebook are well aware of what people think of them. That they looked at the technology and thought "we don't have to do anything, those idiots hate us so much they will do the job for us and give us the private marketplace we desire"

[-] halm@leminal.space 6 points 1 year ago

I was going to reply but you nailed it. Its about outmaneuvering smaller competitors and controlling the marketplace, and then harvesting user data for profit.

[-] MostlyHarmless@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago

They can already harvest the data. Nothing on the ActivityPub is private

[-] halm@leminal.space 6 points 1 year ago

Sure, ignore my actual point. This is getting monotonous; enjoy Threads.

[-] MostlyHarmless@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago

What point was that? If you don't join Threads, they don't have your data. They do have everything you publish to the Fediverse though, no matter what you do.

[-] halm@leminal.space 3 points 1 year ago

Buddy...

Its about outmaneuvering smaller competitors and controlling the marketplace

Work on your reading retention instead of plastering your one-note hot take all over the convo. This exchange is over.

[-] MostlyHarmless@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago

How? Everyone says some form of this, but never gives any details of how they will do that. Or how defederation will prevent that.

You are afraid that they will control the marketplace, and then turn around telling everyone to defederate, which just gives them a walled garden marketplace on a silver platter.

[-] whofearsthenight@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

Embrace, extend, extinguish.

Serious question: how?

Second question: why?

What are the mechanics by which they are going extend or extinguish the fediverse and how would they do that from a technical standpoint? Second, why when the entire fediverse with years of time behind it is a rounding error compared to a product they launched like 6 months ago. Why does Meta give a tiny shit about the fedi compared to TikTok, for example?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] KpntAutismus@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

sometimes, it's just about the principle.

and if the principle is "keep zucc the fuck away from the fediverse", i'm all for it.

[-] MostlyHarmless@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago

But it doesn't keep him away. Defederation means they consume all of the data from ActivityPub, you consume none of theirs. You are creating a walled garden for them that makes it harder for Threads users to leave.

[-] Arcka@midwest.social 1 points 1 year ago

Defederation means they consume all of the data from ActivityPub, you consume none of theirs.

It's not that simple.

Their instance will be sent the data only if the post originates on an instance/community that is still federated with their instance. If a new post or comment is made in a community who's instance isn't federated with their instance, it will not be sent via ActivityPub. A more detailed explanation of how that works is in this post.

[-] EatATaco@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

It's about the principal of throwing out our own principals because we hate someone!

[-] prole@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago

Throwing out your principals [sic].

Please don't speak for me.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] dustyData@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago

Someone failed ethics class really hard.

[-] SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 year ago

This critique of "user choice means that every instance should try and be as open as possible and try and federate with as many compatible entities as possible, so that any user, from any instance, might find and interact with content from everywhere" is as valid for instances blocking Threads as it is for blocking instances for allowing hate speech and bot-boosted corporate ads.

Personally, I prefer those to be blocked and have "user choice" mean users choosing to participate and promote the instances they believe are more useful, because my "user choice" is "I don't want all kinds of bullshit to arrive unfiltered at my feed".

[-] assassinatedbyCIA@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

So many people here are acting like lions, jaguars, attack zebras etc don’t exist. There is no way on this earth that meta is coming into the fediverse with good intentions. Just because we advocate for FOSS doesn’t mean we have to be foolish and vulnerable. Being closed to meta is consistent with being supportive of FOSS, because make no mistake, meta is here to kill the fediverse.

[-] FuyuhikoDate@silkky.pub 2 points 1 year ago

relevant xkcd my friend ;) The fediverse is still open.

[-] yuki2501@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

You just sounded like:

You don't allow nazi clubs in your area? Ah hah! Gotcha! So much for the "tolerant left"!

🙄

Seriously, why are there so many people ignorant of the damage Facebook has done not only to social media, but to democracy as a whole? You're aware of Facebooks role in Trump's election in 2016, aren't you? Haven't you heard of Cambridge Analytica? Of the Russian troll farms? Of the millions of fake Republican Facebook accounts?

(Sometimes I wonder: Is Lemmy getting filled with shills, or are people THAT clueless? Has the pandemic suddenly affected our long term memory or something?)

How can you not know about this? Seriously!

[-] corbin@infosec.pub 1 points 1 year ago

Yes, I’m aware. Fediverse also has nazis, they’re everywhere. I can put on my big boy pants and block them as I see them, instead of an admin doing collateral damage and preventing from talking to all the other people who won’t leave Threads.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] chitak166@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Yeah, can't expect people in power not to use it to further their agenda.

this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2023
1244 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

60042 readers
3182 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS