this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2024
105 points (91.3% liked)

Fediverse

17758 readers
1 users here now

A community dedicated to fediverse news and discussion.

Fediverse is a portmanteau of "federation" and "universe".

Getting started on Fediverse;

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

"Threads is deepening its ties to the fediverse, also known as the open social web, which powers services like X alternative Mastodon, Pixelfed, PeerTube, Flipboard and other apps. On Wednesday, Meta announced that users on Threads will be able to see fediverse replies on other posts besides their own. In addition, posts that originated through the Threads API, like those created via third-party apps and scheduling services, will now be syndicated to the fediverse. The latter had previously been announced via an in-app message informing users that API posts would be shared to the fediverse starting on August 28."

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Dirk@lemmy.ml 86 points 2 months ago (5 children)

Daily reminder to defederate from and block threads.net (and optionally all instances that do not do the same).

[–] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com 45 points 2 months ago

Exactly. Proudly presented by https://fedipact.veganism.social/ and https://fedipact.online/why among others.

You can read the human rights abuses that meta is facilitating above.

[–] admin@lemmy.my-box.dev 21 points 2 months ago (2 children)

So... Instances like lemmy.world, that this is posted to?

yes, I'm federated with them as well, but shit like this is why I dislike them being so big. In the end all the smaller instances can either have strong morals and integrity, or have access to the largest amount of content in the fediverse, but not both.

[–] magiccupcake@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago

Ehh mastodon and lemmy don't see a ton of cross talk. Threads is mainly going to affect mastodon instances.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (5 children)

Defedding from threads always seems strange to me. Everyone says it's to protect your data from meta. But they can already get your data. Everything on the fediverse is public. They already have your data.

[–] fin@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

It’s not about the data, but the community. Just like how Google killed IRC, big techs are always trying to embrace, extend and extinguish the services.

[–] heluecht@pirati.ca 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

@Dirk @MrScottyTay Also I think that one should ask the question, what Meta could do with the data and what it is doing with the data of their users. For their users they use the usage data to present them a feed that the users appreciate. Also they use it to place ads inside of their apps. Also they use the data to serve you ads outside of their system on ad networks that use data from Meta.

All of this is technically not possible for Fediverse users.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] kerthale@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Maybe we should do a reverse embrace-extend-extinguish where we open everything up until the point that they start introducing ads to enshittify the platform. Then after that great migration say goodbye to them

[–] troed@fedia.io 8 points 2 months ago (8 children)

They can't place ads in your feeds.

[–] niartenyaw@midwest.social 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

they technically could do this by representing ads with posts.

[–] troed@fedia.io 3 points 2 months ago (9 children)

Why would you subscribe to those? Or are you claiming they would post ads as if they are from a user? In the latter case - the EU would shut them down before they even had time to deploy that.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] dessalines@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Most platforms (especially reddit, instagram, twitter) moved ads from ad-dedicated spaces, to authentic-seeming posts, that are actually ads.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] kerthale@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That’s exactly the point. There are a lot of users on Threads who might be happy with the Fediverse. Threads will undoubtedly need a put in ads in their app/instance, their enshittification is inevitable. If it becomes easy for users to move over to more friendly Fediverse instances, that is a win.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] flancian@social.coop 5 points 2 months ago (13 children)

@Dirk @xelar thanks for your view, question: defederating with threads seems reasonable, but why would you defederate "second level" like this? I ask as the instance I'm in decided not to defederate with threads for now and I'm personally OK with that.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] Rubisco@slrpnk.net 38 points 2 months ago (3 children)
[–] JetpackJackson 15 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Who's the artist of the image? I like the art style

Also the scared Lemmy and mastodon :( I feel bad for them

[–] khaleer@sopuli.xyz 15 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] JetpackJackson 6 points 2 months ago

Oh sick I didn't realize it was his work, nice, thank you!

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] brown567@sh.itjust.works 29 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That same Meta that performs emotional manipulation experiments on its users without informing them or receiving their consent? No, thank you!

[–] hightrix@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

To be fair, this is describing all advertising.

[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago

Fuck off Zuck, you're not welcome here.

[–] VolumetricShitCompressor@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Fuck the Zucc

This won't affect the Fedipact instances like dbzer0, right?

[–] DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Nope. But world agreed to it and this could hurt the fediverse in the overall since world is the majority

[–] Rayspekt@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yeah that's the reason why I moved away from lemmy.world.

[–] DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 months ago

Same here. Fucking sell outs

[–] beliquititious@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Embrace, extend, extinguish.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] troed@fedia.io 4 points 2 months ago (2 children)

It's awesome that Threads federate with Mastodon. I follow several accounts on Threads I otherwise wouldn't be able to, just as I bridge with Bluesky.

Me federating with Threads makes absolutely no difference whatsoever to what they could or could not do with my data.

[–] Kraiden@kbin.earth 40 points 2 months ago (5 children)

No. Threads federation should be treated the same way as a wolf joining a "sheep's right to not be eaten" meeting. Deeply unsettling, highly suspicious, and troubling. Facebook does NOT want the fediverse to succeed, and any claim to the contrary is fucking sus.

[–] oxjox@lemmy.ml 10 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Other than general assumptions and track-record and being a business that sells user data, is there any actual evidence or clear and present ways that Meta could do harm to the Fediverse / its users?

All I've read is that it seems suspicious and we shouldn't trust them. I totally agree with that but I'd like someone to give some examples of what they could do as a member of the network. I've read how they could post advertising – how would that work?

I ask because, like the previous comment, the idea of following people from other, more popular, federated platforms from the comfort and security of "open source" (?) platforms is appealing. At the same time, if this is leaving me and my platform vulnerable to something specific, I'd like to either proceed with caution or not proceed at all.

The biggest loss for me when leaving Twitter was losing access to so much happening in my community and local news and government organizations. They're all still posting on Twitter and Facebook and Instagram and not moving to the open social web. More and more are moving to Threads though so it would be nice to maintain / regain exposure.

[–] a1studmuffin@aussie.zone 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The basic idea is that a huge company with infinite money creates software that supports an open standard, such as Threads. Next they spend significant amounts of money driving users to their software, rather than an open software equivalent. Once they've captured a huge percent of all users of the open standard, they abandon the open standard, going with a proprietary one instead. They'll make up some new feature to justify this and sell it as a positive. Because they control almost all of the users at this point, many of the users they don't control will decide to switch over to their software, otherwise the value of the open standard drops significantly overnight for them. What's left is a "dead" open standard that still technically exists but is no longer used. You can find plenty of past examples of this pattern, such as Google and XMPP.

[–] oxjox@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Sorry, but that makes no sense at all. Why go through all that trouble when they’ve already accomplished the end goal you’ve outlined?

[–] a1studmuffin@aussie.zone 3 points 2 months ago

To kill any competition and ensure they retain control over future standards. Money. It's pretty straightforward.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] HKayn@dormi.zone 4 points 2 months ago

XMPP didn't die, so why would the Fediverse?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] xelar@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 months ago (10 children)

Theres no balance when one instance floods the whole network with millions of users. Soon people will mean that "threads" is whole "fediverse" .

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] istanbullu@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 months ago

The largest social media operator in the world had to adopt open source concepts and ActivityPub in order to compete. I see this as a huge win.

[–] vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 months ago

But why?

Simply put, there aren’t a lot of us, we don’t like them, and we aren’t particularly nice people, even to people we don’t dislike a priori.

It seems like a poor business decision.

load more comments
view more: next ›