You are only browsing one thread in the discussion! All comments are available on the post page.

Return

PabloDiscobar ,
@PabloDiscobar@kbin.social avatar

And now the emotional argument...

Why is it so hard for some people to admit that some precaution is required when we are dealing with predators like Facebook?

Let's focus on what we have instead of spending our time and money on federating a monster with 100 millions accounts.

We don't want to become a threads client. Our development must be independent of Facebook. It won't be independent anymore if 95% of the content is coming from Facebook. We need time to digest more users and now is absolutely not the time to federate such a big thing as 100 million users.

Get real. If people want threads then let them install threads. Nothing wrong with that.

And please stop with the "friends" thing
We get it: your friends are on Facebook. We are building something different. That's all.

wrath-sedan OP ,
@wrath-sedan@kbin.social avatar

Why is it so hard for some people to admit that some precaution is required when we are dealing with predators like Facebook?

I think this author of this piece is very clearly in favor of precautions and state their preferred integration as "silence" mode not unfettered federation:

"Personally, I would federate with Threads in “silence” mode: my instance’s users would be able to follow Threads users and vice versa, but posts from Threads would not show up in any public timelines on my server."

I agree that there should be precautions in place to prevent a glut of threads content dwarfing all the locally produced content. I think the fear is that if some instances go for the hard defederation route, defederating from threads and threads-federated instances, we will effectively be bisecting the existing fediverse in two, which may be a cure worse than the disease.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • [email protected]
  • All magazines