I just read this point in a comment and wanted to bring it to the spotlight.

Meta has practically unlimited resources. They will make access to the fediverse fast with their top tier servers.

As per my understanding this will make small instances less desirable to the common user. And the effects will be:

  1. Meta can and will unethically defedrate from instances which are a theat to them. Which the majority of the population won’t care about, again making the small instances obsolete.
  2. When majority of the content is on the Meta servers they can and will provide fast access to it and unethically slow down access to the content from outside instances. This will be noticeable but cannot be proved, and in the end the common users just won’t care. They will use Threads because its faster.

This is just what i could think of, there are many more ways to be evil. Meta has the best engineers in the world who will figure out more discrete and impactful ways to harm the small instances.

Privacy: I know they can scrape data from the fediverse right now. That’s not a problem. The problem comes when they launch their own Android / iOS app and collect data about my search and what kind of Camel milk I like.

My thoughts: I think building our own userbase is better than federating with an evil corp. with unlimited resources and talent which they will use to destroy the federation just to get a few users.

I hope this post reaches the instance admins. The Cons outweigh the Pros in this case.

We couldn’t get the people to use Signal. This is our chance to make a change.

  • ScaNtuRd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m hoping that ALL admins across the Fediverse will defederate from Meta. At least we get to have our own separate platform then.

    • amiuhle@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      They shouldn’t just defederate from Meta, they should defederate from any other instances that federate with Meta. Like a firewall against late stage capitalism

      • TaleOfSam@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Meta willingly under-moderated across large swaths of east Asia and Africa, leading to unchecked rumors and tangible acts of genocide. Zuckerberg has compared himself to Augustus Caesar.

        I think it’s acceptable to cut off a wildfire before it spreads.

        • masterspace@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Lemmy is run by a bunch of tankies and the entire fediverse is under-moderated.

          Cutting off a ton of users and content from the fediverse is stupid and everyone in here just keeps coming up with vague generalities because they’re scared of Meta rather than have actually thought through what will happen and be able to articulate any actual harms.

          • Marxine@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            “Boo hoo tankies bad, but big corpo run by billionaires who spread misinformation and intentionally act to topple legitimate governments in favor of their fascist agenda are akshually good”

            Arguing with people like you (corporate shill) is a waste of time, so I’d rather have fun instead.

  • Move to lemm.ee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think the issue being missed here is that Meta will ultimately aim to suck all users into themselves, and then once they feel they’ve done enough of that, they will go completely closed, even potentially forking the protocol itself. If any legal attempt to stop this is made they will bog it down with hordes of lawyers for decades.

    Their goal is not to help fediverse, it is recognising fediverse to be a threat and aiming to absorb it. Literally no different to how reddit slowly absorbed all internet forums into itself, killing the distributed internet.

    Fediverse is attempting to bring back that distributed internet and they’re trying to find ways to kill it. All corporations seek monopoly, it’s how capitalism works.

  • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️@yiffit.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    If they defederate from other instances, they just means Threads users won’t see those instances. Those instances will still see Threads content, if they want. The content is also shared across instances this way, so their servers largely don’t matter. Whenever Lemmy.World or Yiffit.net is down or having problems, I just bop over to Kbin and it’s like those other two instances never actually dropped out since I can still see and interact with their posts.

    I don’t see how in any way shape or form Threads can or will fuck up the entire fediverse when even if they have a majority of the users, their content gets spread around the whole network and doesn’t stay on shit they control.

    And if you’re worried about their app collecting data: then don’t fucking use it. Unless you think their app, on someone else’s phone, will collect YOUR data somehow, this is a completely bullshit argument.

  • janWilejan@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    For those who don’t know, the strategy is called Embrace, Extend, and Extinguish. The phase comes from Microsoft who used this to (try to) crush competing document editors, Java implementations, browsers, and operating systems. Other big tech companies employ similar strategies.

    Facebook coming to the Fediverse is the Embrace phase of this process and that makes Mastodon, Lemmy, Kbin, Misskey, and Akkoma the competitors.

  • _cerpin_taxt_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    If I wanted to see content from my racist Trumper uncle, I would just create a Facebook account. Keep Threads far away from the rest of the Fediverse. We don’t need to compete with them. Who cares if they’re way bigger with way more content if 99% of that content is garbage?

    • RedAggroBest@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      if 99% of that content is garbage?

      Counterpoint: beans.

      Serious note: I think the point of decentralized networks like this is that each instance will have to choose to federate with Threads or any other future corporate social media. If that sounds dangerous, welcome to the freedom of choice baybee! It sucks that the truth is that as long as we want this to be a free space where people can choose what and where they see content, that means some will choose to work with the big-easy-techgiant rather than take a harder approach because 99% of people aren’t that invested.

  • dystop@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Everyone is talking about defederating because of XMPP and EEE. But the very fact that we know about EEE means that it’s much less likely to succeed.

    Zuck is seeing the metaverse crash and burn and he knows he needs to create the next hot new thing before even the boomers left on facebook get bored with it. Twitter crashing and burning is a perfect business opportunity, but he can’t just copy Twitter - it has to be “Twitter, but better”. Hence the fediverse.

    From Meta’s standpoint, they don’t need the Fediverse. Meta operates at a vastly different scale. Mastodon took 7 years to reach ~10M users - Threads did that in a day or two. My guess is that Zuck is riding on the Fediverse buzzword. I’m sure whatever integration he builds in future will be limited.

    TL;DR below:

    • notavote@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think that FB even knows that lemmy exist, problem is they are so big they will crush us by accident.

      Even back than with XMPP, Google didn’t kill it intentionally. No one expected it will be smaller than before google used it. I remember watching empty list where all friends were. But it happened, and I never thought that Google wanted to kill XMPP.

  • flamekhan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Love the dialogue here but you always have to follow the money trail. The best way to keep what we love is to bankroll our instances to keep them running and scalable to additional users without ads. Remember, if you aren’t paying for the product then you become the product. Meta has nothing without selling ads or monetizing user data. That’s their business model. As long as we chip in we can always maintain our independence. I’m fine with never seeing or interacting with content from Threads.

  • eee@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I get all the hate for meta and zuck, and I agree that they would only do so for their own commercial benefit, but I don’t think we should defederate without seeing what federating means. Everyone here is instinctively panicking and running around like headless chickens without seeing what it would actually entail.

    Threads is like mastodon. If federating with threads only means that threads users can participate in lemmy, I see that as an advantage for us.

    If we were a mastodon instance, this conversation would be very different.

  • HopperMCS@twisti.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Regardless of what anyone thinks about politics, nothing good will come by letting them in. I hope all current instances defederate, I know mine will.

  • d00phy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Currently Reddit has significantly more users than Lemmy. Has that stopped people from signing up to Lemmy? Twitter has has significantly more users than Mastodon since forever. Has that stopped people from signing up for Mastodon? Has it killed Mastodon?

    The common error I see in all the “Threads will kill the Fediverse” mania is that it assumes the same people who sign up for Threads would have otherwise signed up for Mastodon/Lemmy/Kdin/etc. 99.9% of them probably never would have. They want something that’s easy and just works; and they’re willing to let a company profit off their data to have it.

    • trainsaresexy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s about threads becoming the fediverse by virtue of their size and resources, and then making changes to the protocols which ultimately lock out the actual fediverse. It will be ‘fediverse, by Meta’ where everything is hosted and run by meta.

      • bighi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        And how do you think defederating them will affect that at all?

        They can just use their influence and say “here, W3C, add this and that to the protocol”.

        How will a small mastodon server with a few thousand users stop that? Defederating them is useless.

        • trainsaresexy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not totally sure, but I don’t think that negotiating with Threads on anything at any point is a winning strategy. They’ll win every time. Kind of a ‘give them an inch they take a mile’ situation in my head.

          At least by staying separate the user base will have to make a conscious decision about where they want to spend time instead of letting Meta dictate that for them in the future.

          It is harmful either way. Not a great situation for fediverse. I wouldn’t say defed is useless, it clearly does something. Effective? Not sure.

          • bighi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Not totally sure, but I don’t think that negotiating with Threads on anything at any point is a winning strategy. They’ll win every time. Kind of a ‘give them an inch they take a mile’ situation in my head.

            Federating with them isn’t “negotiating” in any way.

            Any fear of Threads controlling the protocol is out of our hands, because the protocol isn’t in the hands of the Mastodon devs, it’s in the hands of W3C. So no matter what Mastodon instances do, it won’t affect Threads and W3C.

            At least by staying separate the user base will have to make a conscious decision about where they want to spend time instead of letting Meta dictate that for them in the future.

            I think that by not federating with them, we’re TAKING AWAY the option for people to make a decision, and forcing the worst possible choice on them. Imagine I want to follow a guy that is really popular on Threads. If Mastodon federates with them, I can decide to make an account on Mastodon and follow the guy from the safety of a network that it not governed by algorithms that promote hate, or I can decide to make a Threads account and follow them there. It’s my choice.

            But if Mastodon instances do NOT federate with Threads, the only way for me to follow that popular guy is by creating a Threads account and using the Threads app. By not federating, Mastodon removed my ability to choose and forced the worst possible option on me.

            We should want MORE people using Mastodon, not fewer people. Let them follow Threads profiles from the safety of Mastodon.

            • trainsaresexy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Allowing their platform access to the fediverse is giving them something they want in exchange for access to a larger user base for us. It’s a form of trade or negotiation, however you want to look at it it’s a choice to exchange something of value.

              You’re looking short term. The issue here is that Meta is going to be able to destroy the fediverse later, not right away.

    • notavote@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I also think they don’t care about us, I doubt they even know we exist.

      That doesn’t change that they would destroy us unintentionally. Like Vogons.

  • ReveredOxygen@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Luckily, they can’t force federated access to be slow. Once you federate with them, their content is copied to your instance. It’s not necessary for every fediverse user to contact Threads, it’ll just be served from each user’s home instance

  • Fuck Work@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I am not worried about this. I think threads is going to end up like all the fascist instances. Perhaps they will have more users… Good for them. But the rest of us will defederate and they will become an isolated instance. Which begs the question, why use activity pub at all? I suppose maybe its so they can run multiple servers themselves and piggy back on the infrastructure that was laid down for free. As long as most of us defederate its not going to change much. You could get about as much data scraping timelines now as they could siphon up with federating. So small instances will continue to federate with each other and that will end up being a smaller amount of the people using the fediverse. The only way this matters is if we obsess about numbers. But honestly most of us can’t afford to run a big instance anyway, so obsessing about unattainable numbers is pointless. It doesn’t change the economics at all, it doesn’t change the fact that small instances will federate with each other and not stuff we don’t like. It may change the privacy stuff, which is something we can fix with some vigilance.

    • notavote@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Maybe they want to use Activity Pub so that they can influence further development of it. I don’t know procedure how w3c is makeing decisions and updates to it, but I doubt someone that is not using it can have influence.

  • XenGi@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The content I want to have will never be on a meta server. And even if, I will not federate with them and not use them.

    For the exact same reasons I also don’t use Facebook.