“I know there’s a ton of skepticism about Meta entering the fediverse — it’s completely understandable,” Cottle says. “I do want to kind of make a plea that I think everyone on the team has really good intentions. We really want to be a good member of the community and give people the ability to experience what the fediverse is.”
If I wanted Facebook shitposts and forwards from KlanMa, I’d’ve joined Facebook. And I don’t believe Meta has good intentions, I believe they want to overwhelm the fediverse, and I believe they want to make money. Middle-manager Cottle and their team may have good intentions, but corporate certainly doesn’t, and I certainly don’t trust their users.
If I wanted Facebook shitposts and forwards from KlanMa, I’d’ve joined Facebook.
I want to connect and talk to people from the Metaverse (Facebook and Threads, is it called like that?) without using their account and applications. Meta connecting to Fediverse is a good move in my opinion and what the world needs (I’m not sarcastic at the moment). In fact, I wish every company in the world offering social media would connect to the Fediverse. We have builtin ways to block other instances if we don’t like them. Hell even Reddit should do it…
Yeah, I love the idea of the fediverse because it creates a democratized community where anybody can choose to listen to who they want. Unfortunately this attracts very clicky users that feel like they own the fediverse and want to push others out. I’ve seen it a couple times already with people clambering to defederate other instances they don’t like. Thankfully we can just choose to not listen to them, lol.
I don’t like Facebook and I understand the concerns that Facebook will sort of take over the fediverse from the inside like a parasite. But at the end of the day you can just spin up a vanilla instance and connect with anyone willing to do the same. That’s what’s great about the fediverse.
If you’re talking about the problem of someone acting like they get to decide who is allowed and what happens on the platform, I agree in principle, but that’s why the fediverse exists.
I can’t see anything good coming from a company that actively spreads hatred and racism. Most of came here to get away from reddit and I keep everyone saying fuck spez, fuck reddit but hey let’s invite someone who 100 worse than spez to the fediverse. Someone who has no morals at all, someone who admits he doesn’t care about privacy. Why? Just so that fediverse can grow? Is it really worth it? So you can speak with friends on threads? Make a threads account and use an ad blocker to talk to them.
I don’t mind bridging with other protocols like bluesky but I don’t not see any value in federsting with threads it will only fil the the fediverse with so much crap that we will not able to block it.
Well that is my opinion anyway
(hi ya!) Yes, totally understandable. The thing is, I am not inviting spez or suckerburg, but the users. They don’t take control over Fediverse and we have the ability to block any instance or person we want. It’s not just that Fediverse can grow, but so that it becomes the standard protocol to communicate with others. Fediverse isn’t a specific platform.
( Edit: This paragraph is just an analogy in other areas, where bringing them together benefits the users, just so they can communicate and interact with each other. ) It’s basically asking for every game company open to cross play games or that Windows users can write with Linux users through web technology, with their favorite applications, accounts and servers.
Finally we have an universal protocol that can be adapted by anyone, similar to what HTML became for websites. I understand the concerns, and there is also a reason why I left Facebook over 10 years ago, don’t use Twitter and Reddit.
I get what you say but Facebook is full of toxic users it’s not suckerberg the problem. And defederating will not help because you will have to defenderate also with instances that want to federate with Facebook or else the messages will eventually come through. At least that how I
understand federation works. So eventually you would have to fediverses.
I would love to have a unifiying protocol but I really don’t think it will work. It will split people eventually someone will fork the protocol so that it can not federate with Facebook, splitting it.
Yeah, that would zuck, if it works like this and we cannot de-federate effectively. This problem needs to be solved off course, but that is something that can be integrated later. The important part is, let the users federate if they want, let them decide. That off course should only happen if the system is working correctly (such as entirely federating, like you suggested). Edit: Too many But(t)s removed.
And if someone truly creates a fork of the protocol, then it would most probably be compatible. And you could switch to it if you truly want to. That’s the point of it, which people and we don’t get with Facebook. I do not want to use their spyware and not be part of it, but I want to talk to people using it (like family).
I am not sure it can be fixed because that is just how federation works else the activity pub would have to rewriten from scratch.
I don’t see the fork being compatible because that is the reason to fork it in the first place, people not agreeing with what should be federated or not.
I don’t think isolationism is going to help the Fediverse thrive, or that there are no worthwhile users on Facebook platforms that could be persuaded to come this way if they get to see what it’s like.
Having to deal with toxicity from that would suck, but it’s not as if the Fediverse is this pure untainted land either. Worst comes to worst, instances can defederate them.
I am not saying we should completely isolate us. As I said I open with bridging with other protocols. But I am against fedeting with Facebook because yes we are not a pure land but in comparison to the hell that is Facebook it’s better here.
Defederating with other instances can only do so much if not everyone does it
I think in this discussion people aren’t putting in perspective that Facebook as a platform can suck but that doesn’t mean all their userbase is terrible and ill-intentioned. There’s a lot of different people there that could become good contributors in the Fediverse.
I don’t think we should invite Mark Zuckerberg to get the reins of Lemmy, but if some of the artists at Instagram and Threads decide that Mastodon is worthwhile, that’d be pretty good.
Like I have said in other comment they nowhere near to the hell that facebook has.
Also inviting more toxic people will make situation worse not better
Its a double edged sword. On one hand, what you mentioned. On the other, if any other instance moderated the way Meta does they’d be siloed on the Fedi.
Yes. I will never trust anything that Meta or anyone associated with it say. They can try to spin whatever bullshit they like with their PR speak, but fundamentally they are out to make money.
I’m not particularly worried about it. I can block them if they annoy me. And on the bright side, their large user base may help make the Fediverse mainstream enough to topple the tech giants.
How does one connect to users on WhatsApp and Messenger from outside of Meta?
You mail them a fucking letter saying, “Leave meta.”
You call them on the phone and say, “Leave meta.”
You visit them in person and say, “Leave meta.”
Hack into a defunct spy satellite and carve “LEAVE META” in the countryside using its lasers.
People exist outside of meta. They breath, they eat, they shit. Find that pile of meat that exists outside of zuck’s servers and get a message to it.
Shit, how did people communicate before facebook?
If I wanted Facebook shitposts and forwards from KlanMa, I’d’ve joined Facebook. And I don’t believe Meta has good intentions, I believe they want to overwhelm the fediverse, and I believe they want to make money. Middle-manager Cottle and their team may have good intentions, but corporate certainly doesn’t, and I certainly don’t trust their users.
I want to connect and talk to people from the Metaverse (Facebook and Threads, is it called like that?) without using their account and applications. Meta connecting to Fediverse is a good move in my opinion and what the world needs (I’m not sarcastic at the moment). In fact, I wish every company in the world offering social media would connect to the Fediverse. We have builtin ways to block other instances if we don’t like them. Hell even Reddit should do it…
Yeah, I love the idea of the fediverse because it creates a democratized community where anybody can choose to listen to who they want. Unfortunately this attracts very clicky users that feel like they own the fediverse and want to push others out. I’ve seen it a couple times already with people clambering to defederate other instances they don’t like. Thankfully we can just choose to not listen to them, lol.
I don’t like Facebook and I understand the concerns that Facebook will sort of take over the fediverse from the inside like a parasite. But at the end of the day you can just spin up a vanilla instance and connect with anyone willing to do the same. That’s what’s great about the fediverse.
You have just made a solution to a problem that shouldn’t exist in the first place.
If you’re talking about the problem of someone acting like they get to decide who is allowed and what happens on the platform, I agree in principle, but that’s why the fediverse exists.
I can’t see anything good coming from a company that actively spreads hatred and racism. Most of came here to get away from reddit and I keep everyone saying fuck spez, fuck reddit but hey let’s invite someone who 100 worse than spez to the fediverse. Someone who has no morals at all, someone who admits he doesn’t care about privacy. Why? Just so that fediverse can grow? Is it really worth it? So you can speak with friends on threads? Make a threads account and use an ad blocker to talk to them.
I don’t mind bridging with other protocols like bluesky but I don’t not see any value in federsting with threads it will only fil the the fediverse with so much crap that we will not able to block it.
Well that is my opinion anyway
(hi ya!) Yes, totally understandable. The thing is, I am not inviting spez or suckerburg, but the users. They don’t take control over Fediverse and we have the ability to block any instance or person we want. It’s not just that Fediverse can grow, but so that it becomes the standard protocol to communicate with others. Fediverse isn’t a specific platform.
( Edit: This paragraph is just an analogy in other areas, where bringing them together benefits the users, just so they can communicate and interact with each other. ) It’s basically asking for every game company open to cross play games or that Windows users can write with Linux users through web technology, with their favorite applications, accounts and servers.
Finally we have an universal protocol that can be adapted by anyone, similar to what HTML became for websites. I understand the concerns, and there is also a reason why I left Facebook over 10 years ago, don’t use Twitter and Reddit.
I get what you say but Facebook is full of toxic users it’s not suckerberg the problem. And defederating will not help because you will have to defenderate also with instances that want to federate with Facebook or else the messages will eventually come through. At least that how I
understand federation works. So eventually you would have to fediverses.
I would love to have a unifiying protocol but I really don’t think it will work. It will split people eventually someone will fork the protocol so that it can not federate with Facebook, splitting it.
Yeah, that would zuck, if it works like this and we cannot de-federate effectively. This problem needs to be solved off course, but that is something that can be integrated later. The important part is, let the users federate if they want, let them decide. That off course should only happen if the system is working correctly (such as entirely federating, like you suggested). Edit: Too many But(t)s removed.
And if someone truly creates a fork of the protocol, then it would most probably be compatible. And you could switch to it if you truly want to. That’s the point of it, which people and we don’t get with Facebook. I do not want to use their spyware and not be part of it, but I want to talk to people using it (like family).
I am not sure it can be fixed because that is just how federation works else the activity pub would have to rewriten from scratch.
I don’t see the fork being compatible because that is the reason to fork it in the first place, people not agreeing with what should be federated or not.
I don’t think isolationism is going to help the Fediverse thrive, or that there are no worthwhile users on Facebook platforms that could be persuaded to come this way if they get to see what it’s like.
Having to deal with toxicity from that would suck, but it’s not as if the Fediverse is this pure untainted land either. Worst comes to worst, instances can defederate them.
I am not saying we should completely isolate us. As I said I open with bridging with other protocols. But I am against fedeting with Facebook because yes we are not a pure land but in comparison to the hell that is Facebook it’s better here.
Defederating with other instances can only do so much if not everyone does it
I think in this discussion people aren’t putting in perspective that Facebook as a platform can suck but that doesn’t mean all their userbase is terrible and ill-intentioned. There’s a lot of different people there that could become good contributors in the Fediverse.
I don’t think we should invite Mark Zuckerberg to get the reins of Lemmy, but if some of the artists at Instagram and Threads decide that Mastodon is worthwhile, that’d be pretty good.
No we take that into perspective but the good does not outweigh the damage that all the toxic people will do.
The Fediverse has no lack of toxic people, entire toxic instances, and we can handle them just fine.
Like I have said in other comment they nowhere near to the hell that facebook has.
Also inviting more toxic people will make situation worse not better
Its a double edged sword. On one hand, what you mentioned. On the other, if any other instance moderated the way Meta does they’d be siloed on the Fedi.
Yes. I will never trust anything that Meta or anyone associated with it say. They can try to spin whatever bullshit they like with their PR speak, but fundamentally they are out to make money.
Agreed.
I’m not particularly worried about it. I can block them if they annoy me. And on the bright side, their large user base may help make the Fediverse mainstream enough to topple the tech giants.
You can’t topple a tech giant with tech giant tech users. The fuck?
Network effect. Users need the ability to connect to most other users, in order for them to start leaving the tech giant.
They can leave meta and do that right now.
Are you sure? How does one connect to users on WhatsApp and Messenger from outside of Meta?
You mail them a fucking letter saying, “Leave meta.”
You call them on the phone and say, “Leave meta.”
You visit them in person and say, “Leave meta.”
Hack into a defunct spy satellite and carve “LEAVE META” in the countryside using its lasers.
People exist outside of meta. They breath, they eat, they shit. Find that pile of meat that exists outside of zuck’s servers and get a message to it.
Shit, how did people communicate before facebook?
Depending on how far we go, they’d have a scribe write down what they wanted to say.
We don’t live in those times anymore, and a good chunk of people would sooner not talk to you, rather than move a finger to change their ways.
Hence, the network effect.
That sounds like a problem that solves itself, and not a reason to put up with any fuckshit whatever from meta.