I think it’s pretty safe to say that the majority of us are here to avoid another corporate takeover of our preferred platforms. It would seem to me to be a tad irresponsible to allow Facebook into our space with open arms, allowing them to hoover up our data. I would love to keep using Lemmy.world, but will happily change instances if need be, and I feel many share that sentiment.
It’s perfectly possible to create a watertight federated network excluding both federation and scraping from Threads/Meta on Mastodon using authorized fetch and whitelisting.
This is exactly the case. There are so many more users than threads that even though we aren’t directly being fed their algorithm, what makes it to the top of our posts will be content that are at the top of their algorithm.
Are you familiar with the story of EEE and XMPP? If not, I’d say that’s pretty much what Google did to one of the first big federated chat networks.
No one is. Not even you. It’s not a thing beyond it being a thing uninformed people repeat.
XMPP literally just finished their 2023 GOOGLE summer of code. Go check it out. The info is on the workgroup blog.
I personally started to use jabber about 2000-2001. The bridges/transports were ultimately great idea, but flakey as hell. Being purposefully broken constantly by AOL and Microsoft. Beeper anyone ? Not something reliable enough to pull people away from those official clients. Nor a service that could gain a critical mass in its own right. Also keep in mind back then, there was no jabber.social or jabber.world equivalent. And not just because those TLD didn’t exist. There were a ton of different small servers, generally run by strangers you had no real clue about or real trust in. There was no official or semi official flagship servers, professionally run. That the average person could place any trust in. There was hope with Google chat that they would be that flagship server. They weren’t. Google “defederated” and shot themselves in the foot several times. XMPP kept on trucking. What really happened to XMPP, besides me being logged in 24/7 365 for the last 20 years. To this very minute. Was they pursued a standardization path. They now compromise 10 to 12 IETF RFC. The standardization path meant slowing the speed of development WAY down. This is what killed the BUZZ behind jabber/XMPP. Not jabber/XMPP itself. Burdened with the requirements of standardization XMPP developed much slower in comparison to Skype discord etc all.
Truth is, these days tons of people use it without even knowing. It’s in IOT an SIP systems outside it’s original scope of personal IMs.
I'm not sure I understand your question or why you think of those statements as being exclusive. I will try to answer separately.
is the fediverse a service that should allow Threads/Meta
The good thing about the Fediverse is that it isn't a single service, but many federated ones. For any single instance, I think not defederating maximizes user freedom: A user who wants to interact with Threads can do so while a user that doesn't want to see any content from Threads can block their domain.
is it like XMPP and doesn’t have to be popular
I think it's a little bit different from XMPP, in a sense that the Fediverse is a public space where I communicate with strangers, so I would like it to be popular at least among people with shared interests. For instant messaging I just need my friends there, but sure it would be easier if I didn't have to show everyone how to create an XMPP address and what client to use.
That’s entirely different. As an individual, I have the choice to send emails to, or block emails from, Gmail.com.
But on Lemmy, if I am on an instance that federates with Threads, and I don’t want Threads.net to get a copy of my content or posts (or have my content or posts show up on Threads.net in the future), then tough shit for me, my only option is to either go silent or move to an instance that has defederated from Threads.
People keep making the email argument, but it is not the same thing at all. I don’t think it’s fair for a large percentage of lemmy.world’s users to not have a voice in a decision that will absolutely impact them, nor is it fair to have a stance of “then leave then.”
They won’t see any communities from the server they block. Users are not blocked in domain blocking.
Users can now block instances. Similar to community blocks, it means that any posts from communities which are hosted on that instance are hidden. However the block doesn’t affect users from the blocked instance, their posts and comments can still be seen normally in other communities.
Nope Lemmy’s blocking system is cosmetic only. It’s very much useless against defending from real malicious users. I assume the purpose it was built for was under the assumption that it was going to be used exclusively by easily offended snowflakes, which is backed up by the way that most users treat a person’s claims regarding a malicious user or malicious instance.
Not yet anyway. I wouldn’t expect that to stay the same forever though. Especially considering the amount of spam that’s already on Facebook.
Facebook does not have good very good moderation on their platforms (it’s only good enough to keep up their image in the public eye), and I don’t think threads will be an exception to that.
I feel like it’ll probably be one of the bigger sources of spam and hate speech on the Fediverse, at least for servers that don’t block it.
I actually think this demonstrates the exact problem. The reason you can’t do that at the email level is because Google has taken over the entire email space. Ideally, we don’t let threads do that.
Nowadays you have services like Outlook blocking emails Tutanota for “spam protection”. I’d really rather threads not get so big that they can start dictating how the Feduverse operates in that fashion.
As I said down thread, the easiest way to get information with the structure of activity pub is to have a bunch of users and that is because the only way information gets transmitted to a server is by caching it based on post interactions.
That is exactly what millions of thread users in the Fedeverse would accomplish.
It would objectively be more secure in terms of data privacy.
Better, in that regard, is subjective. It sure wouldn’t be more convenient, but that’s why we left Reddit and came to Lemmy in the first place. It sure wasn’t because of convenience.
Yeah I’m not going to criticize anyone for not liking Google. Google’s done plenty to sour people on them. But this is just the height of ignorant flailing.
I think that interoperation with big walled gardens is part of the reason why #activitypub exists. Furthermore, there are no technical measures to completely shut off #Threads, and the social measures are unlikely to work.
I know the risks, I’m old enough to remember #Microsoft embracing and extinguishing browsers and open documents, #Goggle defederating from #XMPP and #Facebook predatory tactics.
On the other hand, I think that federation with the big players is unstoppable. The protocol is open and there is no way to get every last instance to defederate. If people want to see the big players’ content they’ll move to an instance that federates with them. And defederating from those that connect to threads sounds like a Zealot’s suicide pact.
I think that the best way to ensure that #Meta plays fair is to create a fediverse that is as diverse, open and vibrant as possible, with plenty of open services (Lemmy, mastodon, misskey…) and commercial ones (Flipboard, tumblr…) so that threads users will feel compelled to interact and miss us if Meta stops federating or shadowbans external content.
I don’t want everyone to defederate with threads, I just want my server to defederate with threads, or else I’ll leave and find another one. But it seems like looking at this post that there’s about 80% of people that agree with me here.
My worry with them is that they aren’t defederated from hex-bear, but I suppose that they’re already updated to version 19, then I can hop aboard and block the ibstance
Meta don’t need to federate to get all of the ActivityPub information. By it’s nature everything that is posted to it is public and unencrypted - including private messages. This is a PR move instead of a data gathering activity. Maybe also they are trying to bootstrap content into their new platform which would otherwise be a barren wastelend.
Yeah that was my understanding, fb will collect the data whether your server is federated with threads or not, fb could even make alternate servers not named “anything meta” and still get the data, but at this point I think they can just get it anyways. I guess the data would be likes, posts, comments, subs your in etc.
That’s the thing, though, you can’t just quote-unquote “scrape activity pub.”
You have to pick every single instance. Believe it or not, not all data is just on every single instance. It’s usually cached by users connecting with different instances.
People who keep touting the point that defederating from Meta means we are cutting people off from fediverse are picturing this situation wrong. Based on what I’ve read, people see this little island of people compared to the mainland where there will be physical barrier because shouldnt tear down the bridge.
But the net isnt like that. People have just as much freedom creating a Threads account as they do a Lemmy or Mastodon account.
And don’t say that the fediverse is too difficult to understand for the average person. That kind of rhetoric is what will push people away.
Everyone needs to be patient with growth. It’s not going to happen in a year just like it took years for reddit to grow. I do believe that more and more people will be interested in the fediverse once they realize that corporate oversight is non existent here. And that can only happen if we keep the major instances disconnected from Meta or any for profit company.
Thing is, for someone to interact with a Lemmy Instance from threads or mastodon, they’d have to tag a community first in a post. So it would need to be very intentional, which if someone on threads is intentionally interacting with Lemmy, what’s the problem?
But the net isnt like that. People have just as much freedom creating a Threads account as they do a Lemmy or Mastodon account.
It’s not about creating an account or not, it’s about the conversations, who views them, how inclusive are they to all.
The people who would be making comments are not the same people that are running Meta.
And don’t say that the fediverse is too difficult to understand for the average person. That kind of rhetoric is what will push people away.
It is a barrier entry though for many (for whatever reasons). I don’t think you can just hand wave it away like that; that’s not constructive.
Everyone needs to be patient with growth. It’s not going to happen in a year just like it took years for reddit to grow.
The situation is different now, than back then with the starting of Reddit. This time you have a 800 pound gorilla dancing in your living room.
I do believe that more and more people will be interested in the fediverse once they realize that corporate oversight is non existent here.
Unfortunately the Fediverse account creation difficulty barrier of entry may be higher than avoiding corporate oversight. People take the path of least resistance usually. (And yes, it bums me out big time saying that, as we should all try to avoid corporate oversight.)
And that can only happen if we keep the major instances disconnected from Meta or any for profit company.
That’s not the only way though. Good moderation will also prevent that from happening.
–
So, I don’t have a dog in this hunt. Personally I would lean more towards not defederating, to be inclusive, as I’m just an 70s/80s liberal who believes free speech for all, and that it would do more harm than good by excluding a whole bunch of people from conversing with a whole other bunch of people.
Having said that, I do see good points being made on both sides, it’s not a clean decision to make, it’s not binary, it’s analog.
But it does seem to me like a lot of the comments being made on the subject are knee-jerk advocacy based, gatekeepingy.
Nope, I’m fine with small companies trying to make the fediverse better. Meta is full on enshitification, why wouldn’t they bring a new form that we can’t predict over here?
It’s always odd when people stretch inclusivity to mean that absolutely everyone should be able to freely breeze past any and all possible barriers, with no effort.
Internet security, you guys. There has to be SOME minimum activity requirement, or this whole site would be swamped with an insane number of bots. There are multiple written tutorials and video tutorials that tell you exactly what to click and when, in order to sign up. How much easier does it need to be to join? What can you do beyond a video walkthrough for account creation? How the hell did they join reddit? I just don’t get it.
Sometimes these topics kind of remind me of people like the parents who argue that babies and toddlers belong at raves and busy nightclubs. Sometimes having multiple different groups are ok. You don’t usually see videos about how to fix your car on the cooking channel. You also don’t usually get proper accounting advice from random insect documentaries.
It’s always odd when people stretch inclusivity to mean that absolutely everyone should be able to freely breeze past any and all possible barriers, with no effort.
Internet security, you guys. There has to be SOME minimum activity requirement, or this whole site would be swamped with an insane number of bots.
Nice strawman you got there. We’re talking about access to comments made by human beings.
In all forms of communication and commenting, moderation should happen to remove bots as much as possible.
How much easier does it need to be to join?
Apparently people are used to a single server source, and a federation of multiple servers seems to be a blocking point for them. /shrug
Meta is full on enshitification, why wouldn’t they bring a new form that we can’t predict over here?
The people who would be making comments are not the same people that are running Meta.
What does Meta get out of this?
Would I be talking to the c-suite, or to regular people?
Edit: I get it, truly. You want to punish the corporation for bad behavior, and I definately agree with that sentiment; voting with your wallet.
But we are talking about excluding people from conversations, and not hurting the c-suite. Defederation hurts everybody else more than the c-suite. The 800 lb gorilla is already dancing in your living room.
I’m of two minds about this. I have no love for Facebook and Zuk can go fuck himself. I want Lemmy to be free of the same fucks that ruined Reddit and formally corporatized it.
At the same time, I want Lemmy to grow. I don’t want this to be our little corner of the Internet that’s tucked away. I don’t want an information bubble. I want to see user-managed spaces like this grow and overtake the corporate ones.
So I choose to stay neutral. The two philosophies I described are at odds with each other here. I’ll go with what the majority decides – that’s the whole point of it being user-managed after all. I’ll just say that I think we should give ourselves options to reverse and monitor any changes as time goes on. We need to see how things progress, regardless of what decision we make, so we can course correct if necessary.
I can understand this perspective: wanting to spread the gospel of federation, etc.
But I’m starting to come around to the realization that the growth mindset is rotten. It’s what leads to these big centralized/unified platforms that concede on their core in order to reach a wider audience.
I can’t blame corpos for conceding away all identity, because engagement is how they make money, but what’s our excuse?
These aren’t refugees. They’re free to make a lemmy or masto or whatever account any time they want. We don’t have a problem with most of the people. It’s the platform, and all the fucking out and proud racists who are on it.
It’s interesting, because wanting to grow to supersede the corporations can become just like the corporations wanting to grow for profit. The ends don’t justify the means here.
The idea would be that as people here and see about it more, more people would join, but there’s a lot of assumptions baked into that, including that these people are actually people you want on the platform. Like you mention at the end, racists are going to find a “corporate, government free” space to be their own paradise. And we can’t let that happen.
I wonder if this would be possible: content from Facebook is not shown on Lemmy, but content from Lemmy can be shown on Facebook. Facebook users can join Lemmy, but there’s an application process for them so we can vet them.
I’m fine with however things end up, but I do want us to keep in mind that we risk becoming too insular and developing a groupthink. I don’t think it would be a danger to society like conservative ones tend to become, but I don’t want to think Jill Stein has huge support because Lemmy castigates anyone else, for instance.
I don’t think we’re in that position right now, but it’s one to be wary of.
I feel strongly that we should defederate, but i really like your reasoning for being neutral. The fediverse is currently a small community of advanced internet users who see themselves as separate from mainstream users, and the temptation is to gatekeep.
When it comes to Corporates it very much is like the Nazi Bar allegory: you let one Nazi stay because he’s beheaving rasonably and not being nasty, and sooner or later the place is going to be full of his friends and turned into a Nazi Bar.
It’s the same dynamic only with corporate logos, advertising, hypercommercialism and eventual enshitiffication instead of swasticas, racist messaging and violence.
Certainly in my eperience of it since the 90s, the Internet changed very much this from its early days and spirit as commercial interests from their original foothold almost entirelly subverted it to serve their interests.
Yeah, let’s defederate from a major player that wants to participate in the decentralized nature of this protocol. That way we further fragment Mastodon and guarantee its failure in the long run! Good call!!!
If you want corporate control go back to Facebook and Reddit. Seriously. There are places that do what you want already, no need to corrupt this one too.
To be fair, ActivityPub is an open standard, so corporate adoption was a guarantee following any amount of success.
As an advocate for ActivityPub, I want to see more entities using it. The fact that Threads and Flipboard will interoperate will likely convince more corporate actors to join the fediverse, and I don’t think that’s a bad thing.
There will always be instances that block out the entire corporate fediverse, and those communities will still thrive alongside instances that do federate with the corporations. People will have freedom of choice without having to exist in a bubble, and I think that’s great.
The strength is in defederation, where communities can decide who they want to play with. I’m not personally worried about big companies like Meta embracing ActivityPub because their bad behavior will have consequences for them, and the community is starting off vigilant and aware. If they play nice, the community might loosen its grip, but if they act exploitive or abusive, they’ll get shut out from most of the community forever.
It doesn’t seem like tagging on Lemmy is working at the moment, but you could reply to the thread on Mastodon tagging them there, and that would work (only if you tag their Mastodon accounts, lemmy accounts don’t support tagging on Mastodon, as far as I’m aware).
I’m not worried about Threads joining the fediverse. They can’t even properly implement hashtags and trending topics, which already puts them far behind Mastodon and X.
Also, how would users on a microblogging platform be able to interact with a Lemmy instance? I’m a bit confused about how ActivityPub works in that respect.
The ‘they can farm our data’ argument is a bit moot when Lemmy is already publicly accessible, and it makes us no better than Spez if we are trying to combat people for 'data scraping"
Agreed about the data farming, but I would recommend reading this if you haven’t already. Not properly implementing the conventions is basically step 1 in that article.
Add comment