Those of you not plugged into the Mastodon community may not be aware of the predominant reaction to Instagram Threads. This started when it was merely rumored, reaching a crescendo with reports that Meta had been talking to a few of the larger Mastodon instances under NDA, presumably to encourage them not to “defederate” with Threads when it came online.1 Let me describe that reaction for you, with only mild exaggeration:

1 point

Maybe this is out of left field for this thread, but I just installed threads and it’s nothing like kbin. Is it like mastodon or something?

permalink
report
reply
3 points

While I think that the article is correct in stating that mastodon isn’t currently a serious competitor to facebook, it’s possible that it (or something else based of activitypub) might become that one day. I think that there’s a decent chance that facebook might want to prevent fediverse spaces from potentially becoming serious competitors, and even if that’s not the main reason why their implementing activitypub, if e.g. mastodon ever does get to a point where it can challange meta (which I think most of us are hoping!) then facebook will use the position of power they will have over activitypub to try to prevent that. I think it’s a misstake to give facebook any power of our spaces because that means essentially giving up on the idea of an internet not controlled by large corporations like facebook.

permalink
report
reply
3 points

Definitely. And I don’t think this article is “right” or does predict future (because it can change in a drop of a hat) but with all these doom and gloom comments about Meta/Facebook ruining ActivityPub I enjoy hearing about opposing (and valid imo) views.

But like I commented somewhere else, there is something here that Mastodon and ActivityPub can gain here. Threads is already big (10M users or something) compared to Mastodon (2M users or something). My biggest fear was that Threads was going leech users off of ActivityPub but looking how things are, there’s a chance it would go the other way with Mastodon gaining users. And you’re absolutely correct that Meta won’t play nice but I don’t really see how they’d be able to stop the growth Mastodon would’ve potentially already gotten. But what do I know.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

Not sure if corporate ball-washer or incredibly naïve. Facebook (not using their attempt at rebranding) have more than enough resources to research new and innovative ways to screw over federated instances for their gain. Their goal isn’t to win, it’s to completely dominate. But I’m sure a plucky bunch of volunteers stand a chance against a demonstrably malevolent corporation with infinite money.

I’ve had nothing to do with Facebook or its offshoots since 2015. They’ve used their algorithms to pump all sorts of disinformation and manufactured outrage at the expense of society. That alone should be enough for people to defederate. The abusive information gathering is just the shit icing on a turd cake.

I will likely be shifting to an instance that defederates from Facebook. If that makes me “toxic”, that’s a cross I’m willing to bear.

permalink
report
reply
1 point
*

So, is kbin.social not defederating from Threads then? I’ll be really disappointed if that’s the case.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

The truly toxic idea, though, is that Mastodon instances should not only refuse to federate with Threads, but they should refuse to federate with other servers that do federate with Threads

It’s really, sincerely not. Facebook is a virus and it’s impossible to interact with it without being infected.

permalink
report
reply
7 points

As much as Meta is an awful company, it’s not a biohazard. The crowds of people in it and who interact with its platforms don’t carry it in their bodies like a plague. And this is what it really is about, the people.

I believe defederation is a mistake because this is an opportunity to show people over there, who are possibly freshly out of Twitter and looking for a place to settle in, that there are better platforms to be in.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

it’s not a biohazard

No, it’s far more malevolent.

The crowds of people in it and who interact with its platforms don’t carry it in their bodies like a plague.

Have you explored any of the research on the neurochemistry of social media? It’s too early to have a strong foundation, but what’s there isn’t good. Facebook is absolutely designing their algorithm to change your brain chemistry to suit their purposes, which means lots of toxicity so they can feed your “engagement” to advertisers. It absolutely physically changes your brain, and it’s not for the better.

And this is what it really is about, the people.

It’s not about the people. It’s about whether you can trust their servers talking to yours. It’s about how much of the community they can split out into terrible “Facebook compatible” servers that they can bully their way into controlling.

There’s no path to federating with anything Facebook owns not being a catastrophe.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

There is something to what you are saying, but at this point you are overblowing it and otherizing people just because they participate in a social media platform you don’t approve of. Yes, social media alters people’s neurochemistry, but it doesn’t mean Thread’s users are mind controlled by Mark Zuckerberg.

And it is about the people. However much you don’t like the company itself, and I don’t either, there are millions of people there that are worth engaging with. Treating it as a faceless evil monolith is oversimplifying the matter.

It’s also almost conspiracionist how these discussions have been going. How exactly will they bully their way into controlling a decentralized ecosystem? If you think Meta can just pressure every admin and none of them would resist, not only that is putting no confidence in the Fediverse, what makes you think defederating is going to prevent that from happening? If you start from the assumption that nobody has any principles and corporate influence can’t be resisted, then it’s all for nothing. It would be only a matter of time for the Fediverse to be swallowed.

But as far as motivations and structure goes, I don’t think it is so fragile.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

And the fact is Threads has what, 10M users already? And Mastodon has like 2M? They’re already a success and leeching the 2M off of Mastodon isn’t a big success for them.

My fear was that Threads was going to steal users into their ecosystem but if there’s going to be federation, right now it looks to me like Mastodon actually stands to benefit more than Threads from it (not taking into account EU regulatory systems).

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Over 100 million users as of today, not 10 million.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

They are not altruists, there is no possible upside to anyone except Facebook.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Emotional take and zero technicalitie.

permalink
report
reply

Technology

!tech@kbin.social

Create post

This magazine is dedicated to discussions on the latest developments, trends, and innovations in the world of technology. Whether you are a tech enthusiast, a developer, or simply curious about the latest gadgets and software, this is the place for you. Here you can share your knowledge, ask questions, and engage in discussions on topics such as artificial intelligence, robotics, cloud computing, cybersecurity, and more. From the impact of technology on society to the ethical considerations of new technologies, this category covers a wide range of topics related to technology. Join the conversation and let’s explore the ever-evolving world of technology together!

Community stats

  • 7

    Monthly active users

  • 1.4K

    Posts

  • 8.5K

    Comments

Community moderators