• @PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    02 years ago

    Yeah, the problem here as I see it is that just the same as Twitter, this social media service is still owned by a single owner corporation who is running the service for a profit and they will eventually sell user data or bastardize the service. Ive been on the internet for 30 years, social media and websites come and go and so does their popularity.

    Which raises another point, how are the bills being paid for with any of these services, including lemmy? TAANSTAFL.

    • Marxism-Fennekinism
      link
      fedilink
      English
      0
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Which raises another point, how are the bills being paid for with any of these services, including lemmy?

      The hope is with user donations. As far as I know every instance is losing money though.

  • @Karlmit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -52 years ago

    What is the threat? Isn’t it good that the fediverse is becoming more mainstream? If thread users can communicate with us, it will be easier for them to join us.

  • @LazyBane@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    702 years ago

    Ideologically, de-federating an instance just because you don’t like the guy running it would be a bad thing, but Facebook/Meta has been just so toxic to the internet as a whole it’s hard to really find fault with it.

  • @eu8@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -62 years ago

    I disagree with the prevailing sentiment here. Meta using ActivityPub is going to help ActivityPub grow an will be good for federated platforms like lemmy, and mastadon.

    Lemmy should not block threads.net. Individual users can simply opt out of using threads, but it’s good if we can communicate with people using it and they can communicate with us using a decentralized, free, standard.

  • Seperis
    link
    fedilink
    English
    772 years ago

    Hard agree.

    I don’t really think federating with them is doomsday, tbh (though I go back and forth on this one), but that doesn’t affect my primary reason for my nope. Threads consolidates everything I hate about corporate social media–and for that matter, all social media–without a single part I actually liked and made dealing with the other parts worth it. This is not a twitter clone; it’s like someone asked chatGPT to create a social media network based on twitter for other chatGPT bots to talk to each other. For fuck’s sake, it doesn’t think its users should control what they see on their own feed.

    I am perfectly willing–even eager–to perform melodramatically about things that annoy me in public for fun and when I’m bored and applaud others doing the same; it’s fun times for all and possibly my favorite thing ever. This is not that.

    Threads makes my skin crawl on concept. This is not ‘they do not align with our values’ because come on, Fediverse contains a multitude of values and invents more and i bet if asked, everyone here would list off a different set of values they believe encompass Fediverse and now I’m tempted to see because it would be hilarious. But we can’t even get that far; Threads has no values. This would be a marriage of convenience to a real doll fueled by Facebook’s algorithms and sponsored by Wal-Mart; whether or not it’s a danger to Fediverse shouldn’t even have come up because the first question that should be on anyone’s minds is ‘wait, this is actually a serious question?’ and have been answered ‘lol of course it’s a joke, I just forgot to add the /s’.

    I’m still waiting for that /s.

  • @WhoRoger@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    232 years ago

    There we go. Not the wishy washy mastodon non-announcement. Although I understand their “neutrality” too, it’s still like they wanna seem like the big boys. Sometimes it’s advantageous to be small. This “fuck you” may be just adorable to Zuck, but it’s also genuine.