Whether it's #BlueSky or #Meta, I just do not understand how anyone can possibly give them the benefit of the doubt when it comes to their intentions with federated networking. Like, it's not like the internet is new. We have countless examples of what billionaires do with their power. They never try to make things better for us. They always try to accumulate profit for them at the expense of anyone else. How many times do people need to be fucked over before they learn?
I wonder if people threatening to block Facebook's/Meta's new ActivityPub-compatible social media network also automatically block emails coming from gmail.com.
Meta joining the Fediverse by supporting ActivityPub will be a positive step in supporting their user's opportunity to see alternatives in social networking.
I'm not very sure about the consequences of Meta probably joining the Fediverse, and after I have read here a lot of posts and opinions, I would say that almost all of them are based on rumors. We don't even know what Meta is really planing, which protocols they want to use and in which extent, etc.
First of all I don't think that the target of Barcelona is to do interact (with good or evil intentions) with the Mastodon communities. They real target in my opinion is Twitter, a big social network/market, with a strong crisis due to its erratic management. Anyway I see a high potential of changes and colateral damages to our communities, and some open questions, if they decide to federate.
The first one is about the federation. If several hundreds of millions of new users enter the Fediverse though a single instance, which consequences would it have, especially for small instances? It is possible to handle? I'm thinking about the size of the account table, account cull and administrative aspects.
I suppose that the federated timeline will be monopolized by Meta due to the number of users they have. How can be it solved? If I good understand the concept of silencing, that would affect the searcheability of users of our instances for Meta users and opposite (that is, we would lose the maybe only aspect in which both Meta and Mastodon instances can benefit).
Data privacy and data ownership. Taking in account the reputation and past activities of Meta, can we trust that our data won't be used by the company? Is it any way to protect from it? Or the only solution is not to federate? I hope there is any middle path, but I don't see it.
If Barcelona uses ActivityPub, it is safe to expect that Meta will introduce modifications which are not compliant with the standard. I don't know how problematic they will be, a good candidate is to block possible migration from Barcelona to Mastodon, but I have to say that it is the last of my concerns.
Get ready — it looks like #Meta’s new #P92#Barcelona app that is “compatible with #Mastodon” that you can apparently log into with #Instagram credentials is coming out next month!
Can't say I understand why, but I'm glad the Chief AI Scientist at Meta is determined to convince everyone that the AI industry does not take trust and safety issues seriously and thus needs to be heavily regulated. 🤷♂️
@maxkennerly some people at #meta are very well intentioned even if they themselves are in the dark about all of the malfeasance at the platform over the last 7ish years.
@olavf some employees do generally good jobs but imo what’s happened on the platform as far as information warfare, extremism and conspiracy super spreading, turning reasonable people to mush brained meme addicts etc, has made it irredeemable. #facebook#meta
So, open message: if you're from #Meta and you are working on this #P92 service, you should contact the #W3C#SocialCG to work on compatibility with #ActivityPub.
We're excited about your project and we're here to help.
I'm all about the wider adoption of #ActivityPub by companies like #Meta. I love the fact that we have a protocol that makes social activities a native part of the internet.
If we're worried about algorithms/corporate creep, we should work to ensure ActivityPub providers give users as much control as possible over how they share and receive their information.
Actually, now that I think of it, I have no idea how a provider would handle advertising.
It's amazing how a single man and the ruin of #Twitter can bring other companies to try their chance in microblogging. First years of nothing and then #Spoutible, #Bluesky and now #Instagram/#Meta...
Meta is now selling your Whats App number to “business partners” to send you ads for things like crypto.
The Zuckerberg/Musk/Bezos enshitification of the internet continues.
Here is a great read about how enshitification is destroying the internet and why regulation is needed.
Whilst I am worried they will try the old “embrace, extend, extinguish” plan, I must admit I’m quite excited for #Meta to join their apps into the #Fediverse.
An extra 2bn people to talk to on here! And the ones who really enjoy it will find out they can switch to #mastodon or #calckey or one of the others for a similar experience but with no ads and better moderation. Nice!
@shauny I think you are a bit in the woods here. That would not be a perfect future. Or a very realistic one. Or any type of goal either.
Maybe some of us don't need the big platforms. Some of us left Facebook for a reason. Some of us don't want those people here. That's a choice and a rightful one. Not short slightness. Not everyone needs to have their own servers, but not everyone should either.
@Breznsoiza Das wird wohl so sein. Aber hoffentlich wird es nicht der Sargnagel für das #Fediverse 😐 Ich bin auf jeden Fall gespannt, was #Meta da „zaubert“.
Look at @gruber defending #Meta, one of the worst tech companies on the planet.
A company that’s responsible for Cambridge Analytica, a genocide in Myanmar, and PTSD in thousands of African content moderators—and this is just what has been documented.
However, I still believe that any group should be allowed federate via an open federation standard until they have made obvious 'merits' to deserve being isolated/expelled/defederated.