502
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] KazuyaDarklight@lemmy.world 87 points 2 years ago

I'm still on the fence about that being a good thing. I'm kind of looking forward to being able to see Twitter style content from major companies but without ads via my Mastodon account.

[-] jared@kbin.social 112 points 2 years ago

that's the thing, I see all content from major companies as ads.

[-] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 45 points 2 years ago

Right after I logged into Threads, with a new account, by first 2 pages were posts from Zuck, Wendy’s, Netflix, a Facebook fanboy, and another Wendy’s ad. I tried to screen shot it, but the shit app realized I was idle, and used that as an opportunity to refresh the content.

30 million people jumped into this stupid thing this AM.

[-] TechnoBabble@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago

It detects if you're idle and refreshes the page?

That's some horrible attention hacking bullshit.

I'm 100% going to find another instance if I see any content from that nightmare. I'm not on Twitter, or Facebook, for a reason.

[-] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Or it’s just a bug

[-] icydefiance@kbin.social 32 points 2 years ago

Why do you think a large corporation would just share their content to people who aren't viewing their ads?

They're not just being generous. Corporations are not benevolent. So what are they expecting to get from it?

Here's the answer: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish

[-] dice@lemmy.world 24 points 2 years ago

companies want to reach users, so they join Threads.

meta wants to federate Threads because it allows them to claim that they are not a “gatekeeper” under the EU’s new social media law and therefore not have legal responsibility for the content hosted by it.

a side effect of this is that I can view content posted by companies on Threads via a federated instance.

This is not necessarily the corp’s intention or them being generous. it is just a direct result of Meta using the fediverse as a loophole to get around an EU law and how ActivityPup functions.

I don’t actually think that this is an example of EEE because the Fediverse is not more popular than typical social media experiences, nor does it desire to become more popular or take over things like Facebook or Twitter. It simply wants to be a smaller alternative. I really think if it weren’t for the EU, meta would not be federating Threads.

[-] icydefiance@kbin.social 17 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

EEE wouldn't work on something that is popular. The whole point is to destroy it before it becomes popular. Furthermore, corporations aren't okay with smaller alternatives existing at all. Their goal is to have a monopoly. Finally, Mastodon's growth has been really impressive for the last couple years, so I'm certain that other social media companies are looking for ways to shut them down.

The "gatekeeper" theory has some merit too, but not in that way. You can find the definition of a "gatekeeper" on the European Commission's website and I don't see how federation would affect it at all. That said, gatekeepers are required to "allow end users to install third party apps or app stores that use or interoperate with the operating system of the gatekeeper", and federation would meet that criteria.

Still, we already saw Twitter and Reddit move to paid APIs, and apparently that doesn't violate the DMA, so it's hard to believe that Meta would use a more open protocol without some other motivation.

[-] nurple@kbin.social 5 points 2 years ago

Finally, Mastodon's growth has been really impressive for the last couple years, so I'm certain that other social media companies are looking for ways to shut them down.

Even with its impressive growth Mastodon is a drop in the bucket and I highly doubt any of the major players view it as a significant threat or competitor.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Pseu@kbin.social 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

If major companies want to be on the fediverse, they're welcome to make their own kbin/lemmy/mastodon accounts.

[-] rm_dash_r_star@lemm.ee 41 points 2 years ago

So Meta is up and running now on threads.net, news to me. Hell yeah, ban the crap out of them.

[-] paul@lemm.ee 12 points 2 years ago

What is the benefit of “banning the crap out of them?”

[-] rm_dash_r_star@lemm.ee 53 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

This is how the tried and true agenda goes using Meta's threads.net and the Fediverse as an example.

  • Meta's site gets wildly popular because of corporate backing
  • Meta's site does something on purpose to cause poor operability with the rest of the Fediverse
  • People not on Meta's site can no longer properly communicate with people on Meta's site, they go to Meta's site
  • The Fediverse gets fractured and nobody cares because everyone is on Meta's site
  • Meta's site is the sole survivor and the rest of the platform dies.
  • Meta enshitifies their site as corporations typically do (think Twitter)

So yeah, ban the shit out of them. The proper term is defederate them, but do it with extreme prejudice.

[-] faltuuser@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago

And if an instance get widely popular and gets corporate backing? Should we ban the shit out of them too?

[-] raydenuni@lemmy.sdf.org 22 points 2 years ago

If Facebook bought one of the big Lemmy instances, yes absolutely, defederate it.

[-] faltuuser@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I'm not just taking about facebook. Corpos will come sooner or later. Or maybe one of the bigger instances will become corpo.

[-] jcg@halubilo.social 18 points 2 years ago

Facebook is already here, they've practically got their finger on the start button. Yes, ban the shit out of them, and if one of the lemmy instances suddenly has shareholders to appease instead of their users, yes, ban the shit out of them.

[-] faltuuser@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago
[-] IrrationalNumber@lemmy.world 22 points 2 years ago
[-] MBM@lemmings.world 5 points 2 years ago

I guess that'll also apply to lemmy.world then

[-] daph@kbin.social 18 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I'm not signing up for Threads, but looking at some of the stuff other people show me coming out of there, it might end up just being yet-another-nazi-instance when they open up federation so might just end up getting blocked on those terms and not so much the "being meta/facebook" terms.

[-] patchw3rk@kbin.social 6 points 2 years ago

So what you're saying is we need to open a Threads account and become Nazis?

[-] dice@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago

What does this actually mean? That Threads users won’t be able to see content on those instances (and vice versa) once Threads gets its ActivityPub up and running?

I see a lot of of these instances citing privacy concerns, but everything we do on the fediverse is more or less open info. Unless I’m mistaken, Zucc could have already scraped Mastodon data if he wanted so I’m not sure how that’s relevant.

Now, if they were saying they didn’t want their users feeds to be flooded by Threads content, since posts there will almost undoubtedly have more engagement, then that would make sense.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] speaker_hat@lemmy.one 10 points 2 years ago

Do we also have this list for Lemmy instances?

[-] mojo@lemm.ee 9 points 2 years ago

Thank god my instance isn't run by crazies

[-] stories@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

Which instance would that be?

[-] varjen@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Are the crazies the ones banning threads?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] jtb@feddit.uk 7 points 2 years ago

Suspending them before they have actually done anything wrong is a bit like a pre-crime.

[-] Poob@lemmy.ca 25 points 2 years ago

You don't let pedophiles babysit your kids, and you don't let Facebook federate with your social network.

[-] admiralteal@kbin.social 24 points 2 years ago

You really so sure Meta has never done anything wrong?

[-] Skua@kbin.social 19 points 2 years ago

It's not like "they" are some unknown quantity though, it's the Facebook people. It's not weird or unreasonable for people to not want the company that got fined literally a billion euros for data privacy violations just a couple of months ago to get involved in a thing they like

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] artisanrox@kbin.social 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

They already spread medical disinfo like wildfire, got someone who sold our state secrets to the highest bidder elected, and house sociopathic terrorists like libsoftiktok. That's enough.

[-] janWilejan@kbin.social 7 points 2 years ago

it's more like suspending someone who has engaged in bad behaviour in the past and is likely/promising to do it again. if you own your own fediverse site, you decide what the rules are and how to enforce them.

the difference between the fediverse and the corporate-controlled social media sites is that you can actually enforce your rules against larger companies on your own corner of the internet.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] paul@lemm.ee 6 points 2 years ago

I’m sure Meta is reeeeeaaaallly upset that they’ve been defederated. Lmao

[-] Lotus@l.lakes.com.au 4 points 2 years ago

They'd be spewing. Probably shut down Threads as a protest. Even better, shut down FB ... that'll show us.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ihavenopeopleskills@kbin.social 5 points 2 years ago
[-] Efwis@lemmy.zip 18 points 2 years ago

Meta (formerly known as Facebook) released an app to k on n the fediverse to take on the likes of twitter nd mastodon today.

The war cry is to defederate them before they get to th point of trying to kill the fediverse.

[-] cloaker@kbin.social 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Threads is a twitter competitor by meta. They plan to eventually federate with the wider fediverse and to that end have contacted some of the larger fediverse servers like Mastodon.social (not mstdn.social) to do this. People are defederating before this happens because they worry meta will negatively affect the fediverse.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Marxine@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

Based mastodon.art, I don't use Mastodon anymore (microblogging isn't my thing) but I'm glad I set my account there when I tried it. I remember the folks there being quite the lively and caring bunch.

[-] dookie@kbin.cafe 5 points 2 years ago

mastodon.art is the single worst mastodon instance ever. the admins trick users into signing up so they can hold as much defederation power possible. .art defederates nearly EVERYONE.

[-] butwhyishischinabook@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

Goddamnit Kolektiva

[-] WillardHerman@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago
[-] josephramoney@mastodon.online 2 points 2 years ago
[-] WillardHerman@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

Yes. I mean, I know that N/A means non applicable.

But does the designation of N/A mean that those instances have not gotten back to you yet in answering the question if they are or are not federating.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2023
502 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

73094 readers
2085 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 news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  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, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS