Sharing what's going on with actual #fediverse#censorship happening over on #threads. Zuck has beef with a small #nonprofit newsroom calling out #meta#facebook ethics and they've decided to try wiping it off the internet. Tell all your friends to bring their receipts to #mastodon before they're gone too
Serious question for those that this is relevant to: if you don't understand how ActivityPub works, even a little bit, why do you feel the need to have opinions on how it should work?
Isn't this backwards as hell? Shouldn't you try to understand how something works, then ask why it is that way and if it's intentional?
Too many people here have this strange opinion that they have some sort of privacy, even if their profile/posts are set to "public".
This is just simply not true. We're on the internet. There's over 20,000 Fedi instances and there's just no way to manually parse them to make sure there's no "bad actors" using your "public" posts for whatever the hell they want.
We already see this happening with things like NewsMast which is aiming to be a "news" app where their users don't have to login or register to a Fediverse server, yet they will see posts by Fediverse users from bigger instances based on "categories".
Maybe do some research about how the protocol works and how it's VERY opt-out to the core, before you have opinions on it. Just saying....
An important distinction is slowly being uncovered about the definition of the term "fediverse." Who is it that gets to decide what this place is? How are we being represented? These are not easy questions to answer and if we don't do a better job describing ourselves, then the job will get done for us by people who don't understand the underlying values we hold. #fediverse#meta#threads
I'm really tired of the holier-than-you people on the Fediverse!
No, Threads is not full of trolls and evil people just because Meta is evil. Threads is full of people who are not terminally online like we are. This is idiotic to want to block Threads by default. If anything let's show them there is another way.
No, the big Mastodon instances are not full of trolls and evil people just because they're the big instances. They're full of people who are into the Fediverse but for reasons that are theirs have no time, energy, or interest to join smaller instances. This is idiotic to want to block such instances. If anything let's teach them about smaller instances.
And right now, I see people building bridges with BlueSKy and I see very negative reactions from some people about that. Well... No, BlueSky is not full of trolls and evil people.
I'm so fucking annoyed with this bullshit attitude.
Honestly, if your response is "don't federate" every single fucking time, have you thought for a second that maybe, just maybe, you are in the wrong place? Fedi fucking verse. It's in the name.
If you don't want to communicate with people who are different from you, you're honestly no different from the people you are calling names. Please go to your instance that's defederated from everyone else, or even better, go on a closed Discord or something.
Fuck, I barely finished my second coffee and I'm already annoyed.
It’s funny to me that some people on Threads are saying Mastodon (mistakenly thinking it’s a one service) will always be ”small” and ”closed”. Well, soon we’ll be in the same crowd with the Threads people, perhaps with others like Tumblr too.
The Fediverse can expand unlike the other truly closed social networks. This is exactly like talking about the Internet in the 80s, ”it will be a small thing for the nerds, and always will be so”.
@sab I think the concern is more about tens/hundreds of thousands of toxic bros from Threads jumping into conversations on the fedi. We'll know enough not to follow them, but they'll be able to find us.
The fedi already has every kind of hate and -phobia and -ism present, of course, but if the wrong people from Threads get involved, that could go up by an order of magnitude and push us past a tipping point where our network of volunteer moderators just can't keep up.
"Meta's fediverses", federating with Meta to allow communications, potentially using services from Meta such as automated moderation or ad targeting, and potentially harvesting data on Meta's behalf.
"free fediverses" that reject Meta – and surveillance capitalism more generally
The free fediverses have a lot of advantages over Meta and Meta's fediverses, some of which will be very hard to counter, and clearly have enough critical mass that they'll be just fine.
Here's a set of strategies for the free fediverses to provide a viable alternative to surveillance capitalism. They build on the strengths of today's fediverse at its best – including natural advantages the free fediverses have that Threads and Meta's fediverses will having a very hard time countering – but also are hopefully candid about weaknesses that need to be addressed. It's a long list, so I'll be spreading out over multiple posts; this post currently goes into detail on the first two.
Opposition to Meta and surveillance capitalism is an appealing position. Highlight it!
Focus on consent (including consent-based federation), privacy, and safety
Emphasize "networked communities"
Support concentric federations of instances and communities
Consider "transitively defederating" Meta's fediverses (as well as defederating Threads)
Consider working with people and instances in Meta's fediverses (and Bluesky, Dreamwidth, and other social networks) whose goals and values align with the free fediverses'
Build a sustainable ecosystem
Prepare for Meta's (and their allies') attempts to paint the free fediverses in a bad light
Reduce the dependency on Mastodon
Prioritize accessibility, which is a huge opportunity
Commit to anti-fascist, anti-racist, anti-colonial, and pro-LGBTQIA2S+ principles, policies, practices, and norms for the free fediverses
Now that for-profit tech companies are beginning to implement #ActivityPub, I think it's important to establish what we want with the #fediverse and whether federation with #Threads, #Flipboard, Tumblr, and the like bring us closer to or further from those goals.
With that in mind, I've come up with a few statements (in no particular order) that describe what I think is an "ideal fediverse" — a fediverse that's not necessarily realistic but that we should aim for:
No actor controls a large portion of visible activity.
Users can move between instances without penalty.
Creating and running an instance requires minimal effort.
People on or entering the fediverse understand the variety of available options.
There is no downside to using free and open-source platforms over proprietary ones.
These definitely aren't comprehensive, and if you have anything you'd add, let's discuss that! They're currently helping me reassess my stance on Threads now that Flipboard is also entering the stage, and I hope they're helpful for others as well.
I'll elaborate on these five statements in the comments.
With Meta beginning to test federation, there's a lot of discussion as to whether we should preemptively defederate with Threads. I made a post about the question, and it seems that opinions differ a lot among people on Kbin. There were a lot of arguments for and against regarding ads, privacy, and content quality, but I don't...
I feel the post doesn't really address my concerns.
Really? You think Threads will take over and rule Mastodon? Threads is its own platform, users on the fediverse can still join Mastodon #servers of their choice and leave. I expect we'l see plenty of anti #threads Mastodon servers pop up. If Threads were to somehow get an influence in Mastodon, just switch to #lemmy switch to #pixelfed switch to #firefish So many choices.
This seems to not really understand the risk Threads poses. Threads is its own platform, yes, but it will dominate the visible content of any instance that federates with it. It's very dangerous to depend on a massive, profit-driven corporation for activity on the fediverse, as the things we value on the fediverse (decentralization, transparency, even distribution of content between instances, etc.) go against the corporation's motives. Meta does not stand to benefit from any of the things we value, and most of the Threads userbase (i.e. casual Instagram users) probably won't notice or care about federation. Meta does benefit if everyone depends on them for content, as then they can pull people to Threads just by defederating. People will choose to go to Threads where the amount of activity is what they're used to over staying on their Mastodon instance after activity has plummeted and they can't see most of the people they follow.
This is a big one. Meta might capture the mainstrean fediverse. Lets just be real the average regular internet user wasn't going to join Mastodon in the first place. Not that they wouldn't want to it just isn't on their list next to #facebook#instagram#tiktok#youtube#discord or even #twitter . Actually I take what Meta is doing as a compliment to the fediverse. Remember Twitter at one time under #elon#elonmusk banned the talk of Mastodon or something like that. Threads might not have our interests at heart but they are already mainstream so why should they not allow their users be federated with us?
Yes, there are definitely a lot of people that the fediverse is just never going to appeal to. But of those who are interested in the fediverse, more will be inclined to join Threads due to it having most of the content & just requiring an Instagram login. There is a pool of people out there who will try out the fediverse if they're introduced to it — that's how we all got here — and if people can interact with the big Mastodon, Kbin, etc. instances from Threads, many will choose to do that when they wouldn't have otherwise.
Mastodon is interoperable, decentralized, operated by a nonprofit, lively, and, ACTUALLY, isn't hard to use. So why is everyone championing Threads as the main Twitter alternative?
It's because it is backed by an already-known company that has made it big in the social media space. I personally would love to see what it would be like with #META making #Threads join the #Fediverse
I feel like the reason #Mastodon, and the #Fediverse at large, aren't taking off has to do with the fact that they're actually social networks. People don't seem to want a social network, they want content platforms. People aren't using #Twitter or #Threads or #TikTok to keep up with their friends these days, they're using these apps to entertain themselves. And since #Facebook and every other platform that used to be a social network began pivoting toward content promotion, I think society has forgotten what a social network is supposed to actually be anymore.
Does anyone have any advice on whether to use #threads or #microblogs when you're looking to say, start a discussion about a topic on #kbin? Is there an etiquette for what option is best? Or do people just pick depending on their mood (having a Twitter vs a Reddit sort of a day)?
There’s been a lot of speculation around what Threads will be and what it means for Mastodon. We’ve put together some of the most common questions and our responses based on what was launched today.
Hmm... sounds a bit too idealistic to be true, especially given how Facebook has acted in the past. I appreciate his hope for the future, but I think he severely underestimates the lengths to which FB will go to monetize and control users on their platforms.
Here's the scenario I don't like. Threads scrapes my OC on a federated server, then reposts it to their users with advertisements. Now, not only has FB taken my OC without getting my permission or even informing me, they're now garnering profit from it. If this were a print publication, this would plainly be copyright theft. And if I want to remove my content that's now hosted on Threads without my permission, there's no possible way for me to do so - I can delete the post and hope their federated server does the same, but given how hard they make it to delete a FB account, I'm not terribly optimistic.
It's no wonder #threads isn't launching in Europe - there's no way in hell this kind of thing is even remotely GDPR compliant.
S̶̶̶o̶̶̶.̶.̶.̶.̶i̶̶̶t̶̶̶ ̶s̶̶̶o̶̶̶u̶̶̶n̶̶̶d̶̶̶s̶̶̶ ̶l̶̶̶i̶̶̶k̶̶̶e̶̶̶ ̶M̶̶̶a̶̶̶s̶̶̶t̶̶̶o̶̶̶d̶̶̶o̶̶̶n̶̶̶ ̶c̶̶̶h̶̶̶a̶̶̶n̶̶̶g̶̶̶e̶̶̶d̶̶̶ ̶t̶̶̶h̶̶̶e̶̶̶i̶̶̶r̶̶̶ ̶m̶̶̶i̶̶̶n̶̶̶d̶̶̶ ̶o̶̶̶n̶̶̶ ̶n̶̶̶o̶̶̶t̶̶̶ ̶w̶̶̶a̶̶̶n̶̶̶t̶̶̶i̶̶̶n̶̶̶g̶̶̶ ̶t̶̶̶o̶̶̶ ̶h̶̶̶a̶̶̶v̶̶̶e̶̶̶ ̶c̶̶̶o̶̶̶m̶̶̶m̶̶̶u̶̶̶n̶̶̶i̶̶̶c̶̶̶a̶̶̶t̶̶̶i̶̶̶o̶̶̶n̶̶̶s̶̶̶ ̶w̶̶̶i̶̶̶t̶̶̶h̶̶̶ ̶M̶̶̶e̶̶̶t̶̶̶a̶̶̶ ̶a̶̶̶t̶̶̶ ̶a̶̶̶l̶̶̶l̶̶̶.̶.̶.̶.̶s̶̶̶h̶̶̶i̶̶̶t̶̶̶ ̶ ̶
I made a mistake, it was Fosstodon. They told Meta to fuck off. https://hub.fosstodon.org/assets/images/meeting-with-meta-email.webp
Mastodon is 100% a competitor to #Meta, and if I were #Mastodon, I would watch my back since everything Meta does is only for the benefit (or the endgame is) for themselves and their market share. Best case scenario would for Meta to extinguish Mastodon and have everyone go to #threads.
I do not understand why Mastedon is downplaying the very likely scenario of Meta EEE'ing the shit out of ActivityPub once they get people to migrate to Threads
How Threads will integrate with the Fediverse ( plasticbag.org )
A case for preemptively defederating with Threads ( kbin.social )
With Meta beginning to test federation, there's a lot of discussion as to whether we should preemptively defederate with Threads. I made a post about the question, and it seems that opinions differ a lot among people on Kbin. There were a lot of arguments for and against regarding ads, privacy, and content quality, but I don't...
Mastodon Is the Good One ( www.404media.co )
Mastodon is interoperable, decentralized, operated by a nonprofit, lively, and, ACTUALLY, isn't hard to use. So why is everyone championing Threads as the main Twitter alternative?
From the CEO of Mastodon: What to know about Threads ( blog.joinmastodon.org )
There’s been a lot of speculation around what Threads will be and what it means for Mastodon. We’ve put together some of the most common questions and our responses based on what was launched today.