Kbin.cafe on Blocking Meta's New Threads App
Kbin.cafe on Blocking Meta's New Threads App
As Meta’s new App [Threads](https://threads.net/) has now launched, it's important that I definitively state our stance on blocking federation with Meta if they choose to adopt ActivityPub:...
For those who aren't aware, Kbin Cafe is a Kbin instance I run. Cross-posting our stance on Threads for visibility.
As Meta’s new App Threads has now launched, it's important that I definitively state our stance on blocking federation with Meta if they choose to adopt ActivityPub:
Kbin Cafe will not be preemptively fediblocking Meta. However, I'll be keeping a close watch on the situation as it unfolds, with my finger hovering over the block button. My first priority is the integrity and safety of the community, and with this in mind there won't be any second chances given to Meta--their first strike results in a block.
Efforts are being coordinated by @tchambers and others to build out Fediverse test suites to ensure that all new actors (like Threads) that claim ActivityPub compliance have to prove their claims or be shown where they are lacking. That is the one real defense against “Embrace, Extend, Extinguish” plays by any large actor. To join in and help with this, follow this Frendica group here:
https://kbin.cafe/m/activitypubtestsuite@venera.social
This ActivityPub Test Suite needs to happen ASAP, so any dev support is welcome!
As always, feel free to comment here or message me with any questions or concerns.
-
their first strike results in a block.
What do you consider a "strike"? Does Meta's reputation and history not constitute a "strike"?
-
Good question! By and large, some of the following would count as a "strike":
-
Poor moderation
-
Excessive spam
-
Most importantly: Making non-backwards compatible changes to the ActivityPub specification that may lead to the classic "Embrace, extend, extinguish" situation
-
Probably more...
-
Poor moderation like not moderating hate speech or punishing users for wanting accessibility?
-
By all accounts they haven't even federated yet and it's full of corporate spam.
-
I’d say any automated/integrated effort to direct users of federated instances to the threads site to view content should count as a strike. (Such as needing to go directly to the threads site to view an image that could be easily posted anyway.)
So should any automated/integrated effort to encourage users to make their own threads account. (Such as needing an account to visit this link or view this image.)
Any attempt to coerce non threads users to sign any sort of agreement or TOS with threads.
As well as any data collection on non threads users. Merely interacting with a federated threads account should not entitle meta to any data collection of that user.
-
is it even possible to federate with them without receiving thousands of posts per minute of barely moderated content that would drown everything else in the feed?
-
-
-
Isn't Threads already illegal in Europe? There's your first strike
-
Not necessarily, however there are questions on compliance with the EU's Digital Markets Act which went into effect in May,. So the platform has been delayed until Meta determines or gets guidance from the EU to comply with the law.
The whole reason Threads was launched had everything to do with how Musk has been mismanaging Twitter over the past few months, and most especially the past week. This is why the platform is partly unfinished. Zucks took the opportunity to move up launch to capitalize on Twitter's mistakes.
And it looks like it worked.
-
-
Will blocking Theads on the fediverse prevent following individual accounts from there? If so that feels like a massive problem. I can understand wanting to ensure Threads doesn't start feeding ads and propaganda into the general fediverse streams and that would warrant a strike, but not being able to follow individuals feels like breaking the whole idea of fediverse.