The arguments I’ve heard about tracking etc are misguided and don’t understand the actual risks.
Firstly, posts on the fediverse are already likely being consumed by advertising platforms like Facebook & Google. It would be trivial for big tech companies to setup relays that act as scrapers.
Secondly, the value in platform’s tracking individuals is for advertising. There is no mechanism for these platforms to identify you browsing the we if your instance federated with threads. Your instance won’t share cookie sessions etc with threads. It doesn’t increase your exposure.
Thirdly, these platforms have the know how to deal with spam and they will be incentivised to share that tech with other federated instances.
Don’t get me wrong, Facebook is an evil company. But I haven’t heard a decent argument as to why them joining the fediverse is a bad thing. We always have the option to defederate in the future.
Change my mind.
You must log in or # to comment.
Basically this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish
First they will add loads of new users and become the dominant instances. Then, they will add their own proprietary features that other instances cannot support. Finally, their extensions become the new de-facto standard, marginalizing the original implementations.
Since Facebook has proven itself to be an evil company that does not act in good faith, it is better to not federate with them from the start.
Yup, exactly this for me too. Been done a thousand times before by companies like them. Plus the fact that the fediverse is not run by any company is just really nice - we don’t need them.
No amount of extension will force instances to change. I think your point assumes instance owners will want to have access to those users from threads for some reason.
I would only be worried about the EEE thing if meta assigned a team of developers to work on the Lemmy codebase full time.
Meta has blown 10’s of Billions on the their failed metaverse and you’re wondering if they will have a team of devs on Lemmy? They already do - it will start with the protocol first, not the UI, but you’ll start seeing PRs there too.
You’re probably right, we need to borrow the Linux model with some ahole at the top cutting out crap before it takes over.
No offense Linus, love your work.
Facebook is currently the social media defacto standard. Instances can always defederate in the future. The EEE argument doesn’t fit in this situation.
I’ve been around long enough to see many projects be extinguished.
To your first point, these companies essentially have infinite money compared to you, me, everyone combined on Mastodon. They can and will figure out a way to track you across servers and they will figure out how to exploit that. Cookies weren’t supposed to be used for tracking they way they are, but the money hoarders figured out how to exploit them. Browser fingerprinting wasn’t a thing, but it can now be used to track you. How you type and how you speak online can be used to ID you.
If you think that Facebook is willing to share anything, I just don’t agree. Facebook will create Threads, they’ll put it on the Fediverse, they’ll align, then eventually they’ll start building features that Mastodon, Lemmy, etc refuse to or literally can’t or won’t have the time to do, and then they’ll start selling how they’re so much better and you should come join them, or they’ll say they’re more secure, or they’ll just smear the others. People will flock to the new and better, because hey it’s still on the Fediverse and open, eventually they’ll close it off and strangle the life out of the Fediverse. I’ll still be on the Fediverse, but these platforms are all about content. If people stop showing up, they can still exist, but they’re basically useless. It’s happened before, it’ll happen again.
Facebook has open sourced loads of their internal tools, for instance PrestoDB. Open sourcing their internal tools is an advantage for Facebook as they get contributions from other developers. Fediverse tooling would fit this model.
Remember how Facebook bought Oculus and people thought it was gunna be great because VR was finally getting really strong financial backing but they ended up just making their own VR walled garden that requires you to sign in with a facebook account and you are only able to selectively play with PCVR players if they allow it on their app store?
How is this relevant? Meta isn’t buying the fediverse
Facebook didnt buy the entirety of VR either. But they did fracture the userbase and if you cant spend so much on VR you’re stuck buying into metas walled garden now (Reverb lacks fundamental features) This sorta ground is what Meta is going to go for. They are going to target the largest, most manipulatable audience (which is a lot on here) and swallow them
I’ll give you an ELI5 answer:
Have you ever been playing with your same age friends and then a bunch of older kids come by and ask to join? You say yes and then they take over the field and ball and start playing the game they want and dominate the play. Pretty soon it’s the older kids’ game and you’re sitting on the sidelines.
You can’t put Facebook and positive in the same sentence.
I agree that Facebook is an evil company. But there are instances when Facebook does good things, like open sourcing PrestoDB. Facebook only does good things when it benefits them. I’m arguing that this may be an instance where the Facebook and the fediverse align.
Advertising to people currently on the Fediverse probably isn’t their goal. Neither is just joining the Fediverse. Their goal is to become the Fediverse to swallow it whole.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish
They also have no incentive to share anti-spam tech. They would be giving up a massive sellin g point of their instance if they did.
Additionally, Threads is already stripping its implementation of ActivityPub of some features like alt text and CWs. Worse though is that they’re removing the option for a chronological timeline, forcing their algorithm as the only option for its users. This would be fine, except it would also effect content on all instances (to an extent). Given that Threads will no doubt have a userbase larger than that of most instances, and that posts which play into its algorithm will show up for significantly more people, posts which engage with Threads’ algorithm will be boosted more often, thus showing up for more people who aren’t using Threads.
Say Threads’ algorithm really likes posts that get lots of replies. Someone writes a controversial post on mastodon.social and lots of people on Threads immediately get in arguments in the replies. This post is then promoted by Threads’ algorithm, causing it to be seen by more people on Threads. More eyes on a post means more likelihood of getting a higher number of boosts. Lots of accounts on Threads boost the post, which causes it to be seen by more people in federated instances. Again, more eyes means more likelihood of getting boosted. At this point the post is popular not just in Threads, but also in instances federated with Threads. Which means it’ll pop up more often on other instances that do not federate with Threads. Threads’ algorithm, only being implemented on Threads, extends its toxic influence out even to servers which refuse to federate with Threads.
Pablo Escobar did a lot of great things in his local community. Many considered him a great guy. He’s the Facebook of Columbia. Meta is a predatory shit company that would put everyone in a suicidal depression to make a dollar. At least Escobar’s products had an up side for some people. Meta has no ethics. Only a fool invites a serial killer into their home because they like your new kitchen knives and want to have a look.
24 hours after launch Threads is going to have twice as many users as the Fediverse, and their federation support is still months away (supposedly), so “bootstrapping their platform” is not something they need
You miss the entire point, its mostly about EEE
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish
I’m aware of the EEE argument. It’s just not valid in this instance. Let’s follow the EEE argument. Facebook extends the capabilities of activitypub and makes third party users no longer compatible. Then what? We’re in the exact same place we are now, Facebook having a wall garden and the rest of the fediverse doing its own thing.
You arw too optimistic, there is always a way, and it will probably not replace lemmy or kbin but maybe mastodon or any other healthy ActivityHub service. The danger is there, just because you don’t know the answer to the the real danger doesn’t mean there is no danger.
Facebook (or rather “Meta”) has a buisness model, and its there to damage us all, grow into infinity and be the number one. They will become creative and always take an unhealthy turn whenever its possible.
With very little probability it may become an utopia where everything will be nicely federated and still Open and Open Source. With high probability they will focus on full destruction to gain the most money out of any situation.
