•  altz3r0   ( @altz3r0@beehaw.org ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    31
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I think the plan should be bracing for impact, and how to deal with the after-effect. Because let’s be honest, we are in a late stage capitalism, and Meta megacorp will get what it wants.

    I don’t currently see it spilling it’s poison to Lemmy/kbin. I’m hopeful rather, but I may be misunderstanding how the fediverse works.

    But for mastodon, I would say the outcome is a segregation, as it’s safe to assume that communities that integrate wirh Meta will be consumed. Unfortunately that likely means starting from scratch, with a even nichier community, as far as I can see. Not exactly from nothing, but content loss will be inevitable, which is the Fediverse greatest weakness imho.

    •  arthur   ( @arthur@lemmy.zip ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      61 year ago

      Idk, currently there are no corporations in this field. So protect the fediverse make sense and, what’s the usefulness of fediverse protocol for Meta/Facebook if the rest of entire fediverse is blocking it?

      Besides that, quitting without fight only benefits them.

      •  arthur   ( @arthur@lemmy.zip ) 
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 year ago

        I saw a interesting hypothesis about why Meta wants a decentralized platform. They may want to solve the problem of European user data being hosted on USA. A federated scheme will make possible to be present in any territory, comply with local rules, and keep it’s dominant position.

        Disrupt fediverse may be just a secondary benefit.