Skip Navigation
Fediverse @lemmy.world
Leraje @lemmy.world

Yet Another Post About Threads/Defederating and 'wait and see'

Sorry. I know it's getting a bit annoying with all these posts obsessing over this subject but still..

Just to make my position absolutely clear from the start of this - I think the entire fediverse should defed from anything under any form of commercial control, which clearly includes Threads (when/if it enables ActivityPub).

I see a lot of instance admins are adopting a 'wait and see' approach to defederating from Threads. With respect, I'd like to ask them - what are you waiting to see? Evidence that Meta is an immoral organisation? Surely you can't be that naive?

Or is it evidence that Threads will attempt dodgy things with the ActivityPub codebase? That they will attempt Embrace-Extend-Extinguish? If that's so, I again ask you with respect, surely you can't be that naive? When Meta start introducing little, disarmingly helpful, tweaks to ActivityPub, will your 'wait and see' stance continue? And when Meta role out their own version of the protocol, urging Mastodon, Lemmy etc to adopt it - its free! Its better! - will you still continue to 'wait and see'?

The privacy thing I don't feel is (currently) much of an issue. Meta could easily scrape all our data tomorrow if they felt like it. What I fear is privacy after they've introduced all their 'improvements' to ActivityPub and released their own version. Maybe we'll end up with a two-state fediverse where one state is happy to federate with Meta and the other is not.

The fediverse was built on the principles of open standards and open source, by people, not commercial orgs. It is slow growing, slow to react and in some areas slow to change. These are, in my opinion, amongst its greatest strengths. There is no endless money pot provided by investors, admins are volunteers running instances on VPS's, software creators are people doing it as a hobby. This is people power, not money power. There's no profit motive. The second such a massive profit driven org gets a foothold - and is allowed to - that changes. It's simply inevitable.

Is the fediverse perfect? Of course not. But I believe the problems it faces can be overcome with patience and persistent forward thinking.

Then there is the fact that some instances (and hopefully increasingly more) are seen as safe areas for gay people, trans people, non-white people, women. Opening the door to Meta means opening the door to a whole shit storm of awful people whom we currently don't have the tools to protect communities from. Is 'wait and see' really a good idea given the fact this almost certainly will happen? I mean 'wait and see' what exactly? And yes, I know we have our home-grown awful people here and guess what? We struggle to contain them already! Threads got more signups in the first 12 hours of its existence than the entire current population of the whole fediverse. You want to 'wait and see' how many of those people are cunts? Because the answer is 'a lot'.

The fact is - the fediverse doesn't need Threads, or any corporate involvement. Yes, its already smaller than Threads, it's smaller than Twitter, it's smaller than Reddit. But, at the risk of leaving myself open to obvious jokes, why does size matter? There's already, in my opinion, enough people throughout the fediverse, esp on Mastodon and Lemmy, to have created places where their is good, lively, vibrant discourse. I'd much rather have quality over quantity. There's nothing actually wrong with slower, more manageable growth. We've all got sucked into believing the bigger something is the better it must be and that unchecked growth is healthy. If we're growing uh, 'house plants' then that might be the case, but we're not. Because the fediverse is not (currently) motivated by profit, we don't need unchecked growth. I've seen so many reddit refugees recently talking about how much better the 'feel' is on Lemmy, how much less pressure and angst and nastiness there is. I can't think of a single scenario in which instantly adding double the amount of people, some of whom are pretty terrible, without decent tools to manage them, all operating under the control of a company known to embrace/extend/extinguish and who's sole motivation is profit at all costs can be beneficial to the fediverse.

72 comments

  • How exactly is Threads going to EEE Lemmy?

    I can totally see arguing this re: Mastodon. But there are some serious hoops that need to be jumped through for a user to even be able to see Mastodon-type content as a Lemmy post. Doing Mastodon on Lemmy feels like eating soup with a fork. You can technically do it with enough time and effort, but should you?

    Pitchfork mobs going after Lemmy admins because they haven't already blocked Threads makes me think that maybe the mob doesn't really know what it is they're against, besides just "corporations bad".

  • A lot of people here seem to disagree with this point of view. Now I'm not a very smart guy but, I think you make good points and keeping profit motive out of the fediverse is a great idea. I can't speak for anyone else but it's the whole reason I joined lemmy in the first place (tho the whole reddit thing didn't help) and ever since I've been transitioning to similar platforms for all my social media (mastodon, pixelfed, etc.).

  • Let's face it Meta likes control. Control over your data, control over what you can and can't say and control over nsfw. I don't see meta truly wanting to federate due to lack of control. We all know how they feel about nsfw content and any speech that goes against thier ridiculous algorithms. I expect them to federate with as many instances as they can and cherry pick data. I doubt you'll see half of the fediverse when viewing from threads.

  • I think you need to open your eyes as to the real reason why Threads exists. Instead of baseless claims, let's use a source, shall we?

    It's obvious why Facebook would want to make a Twitter clone. But the Digital Markets Act is likely why that clone uses ActivityPub: https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/europe-fit-digital-age/digital-markets-act-ensuring-fair-and-open-digital-marketsen

    Examples of the “do’s” - Gatekeeper platforms will have to:

    • allow third parties to inter-operate with the gatekeeper’s own services in certain specific situations
    • allow their business users to access the data that they generate in their use of the gatekeeper’s platform
    • provide companies advertising on their platform with the tools and information necessary for advertisers and publishers to carry out their own independent verification of their advertisements hosted by the gatekeeper
    • allow their business users to promote their offer and conclude contracts with their customers outside the gatekeeper’s platform

    The interoperability is the big one. Being federated means that Threads isn't considered a "gatekeeper platform". I wouldn't be surprised if Instagram and maybe even Facebook itself start to federate as well. Since Threads isn't currently connected to the wider fediverse, that's probably why they're not in the EU yet - because it's currently in violation of the Digital Markets Act.

    This also means that fears of "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" are likely overblown and FUD. Breaking ActivityPub interoperability means that they'd be a gatekeeper again and subject to EU regulations against gatekeepers.

    I'm not saying Facebook is innocent. But I think people are so paranoid about things like EEE when there is clear evidence that EEE is not in Facebook's best interest.

    We want the fediverse to be a "normal" thing. Heck, we should get as many corporations as possible onboard, because then fears of EEE go out the window entirely. That's how other protocols like Matter work - a bunch of corporations work with an open entity to decide collectively how the protocol should work.

    And, if you pay attention, the web - and specifically Facebook - has been using open protocols like those for years without issue. Many of these open protocols the web uses were made by Facebook. Some examples:

    • React.js

    React is a JavaScript library that was created by Facebook.

    It makes webpages pretty, basically. It makes things load really really fast while still looking clean and modern.

    Dropbox, Paypal, Discord, Slack, Netflix, AirBnB all use React.

    • HHVM

    HHVM was created by Facebook.

    HHVM is what executes the Hack programming language (also made by Facebook). Hack is based on PHP (the same thing Kbin runs on), but is optimized in a different way and is more flexible than traditional PHP.

    Slack and Wikipedia are the biggest users of HHVM.

    • Cassandra

    Cassandra was created by Facebook.

    Cassandra works basically as an alternative to MySQL. It does much of the same job, but works a bit better making sure there's no single point of failure.

    Uber, Netflix, Reddit, Spotify, and Twitter all use Cassandra.

    • Apache Thrift

    Thrift was created by Facebook.

    It connects programs that were created using different programming languages. They can all share a data format through Thrift, which lets them talk to each other.

    Thrift is used by Netflix, Evernote, Twitter, Uber, and reCAPTCHA.

    Literally you could not use the modern web without using these technologies. I'm leaving 5-6 more out for space constraints. Meta has a loud voice in most of those techs, and outright controls a handful of them. That's been the case for most of the 2010s into the 2020s.

    I wouldn't say I trust Facebook with the fediverse. But I'm also not so quick to jump to EEE because they do have a fairly solid track record when it comes to web tech.

    And I don't think "this isn't a place for normies, normies go home!!!" is a winning proposition to make sure the fediverse becomes big enough that EEE isn't an issue. We want widespread adoption. Smaller instances will always exist, and if that's what you want you should join an explicitly small instance like Beehaw. Let the bigger instances federate and be federated with. Stop spreading baseless FUD.

    • Well, I don't use any of those apps you just listed because, like Meta, they're all privacy invading nightmares. And yet here I am using 'the modern web'. If you genuinely believe they have a solid record when it comes to web tech then - well, you're entitled to that opinion, but I don't share it. I think they have an awful record, in that their tech works, but it doesn't result in products that make the web better.

      It's hardly baseless FUD to suggest Meta might utilise EEE as a growth mechanism when they've actually participated in doing exactly that in the past.

      And the reason Threads isn't available in the EU is partly the reason you suggest but also in large part because of data privacy concerns. The EU knows full well that's Meta's business model. Hoover up peoples personal data and sell it on.

      You also seem to be struggling with what EEE actually means. The 'extend' part of that entails rolling out a modified, non-standard version of the protocol which better serves their interests but is still technically able to federate with other systems. The 'extinguish' part is the years-later death of the original protocol.

      “this isn’t a place for normies, normies go home!!!” - who suggested that? What I actually said was pretty much the opposite of that. I'd love to see open protocol based apps become standard. You, on the other hand, seem to want tighter and tighter ties between corporations and standards. That's the kind of thinking the led to this absolute shit-show of data harvesting companies and ad-stuffed apps that's currently the norm.

      Not wanting to embrace a 'growth at all costs, commercialism is our saviour' attitude is not the same as saying 'normies go home'.

      • Are you really saying you don't use PayPal? I presume you have a job; your job probably uses Slack (or Teams) at the corporate level. You're never streamed anything? You're not coming from Reddit? You don't use Wikipedia? Or Spotify? Or reCAPTCHA?

        I most sincerely doubt that you've never used any of those, all of which run on tech that Facebook built and helps maintain. And I'm not even mentioning the countless small places that use things like React. I'm not joking when I say you literally cannot use the modern web without bumping into a website running React, which was - again - created by Facebook.

        Maybe you think the things I mentioned are "apps" - they're not, to be clear. They're frameworks. You generally have no idea you're using them, because it's something that gets setup by the folks building the website. You don't directly download React.js; you go to Discord.gg and Discord will download React to your machine and run it to display Discord. Same thing with Wikipedia - you go to Wikipedia, it uses HHVM to show you the page you want.

        If you knew all that already and still think you don't use tech run by Facebook, then your ignorance of how the web works is shocking.

        I also think you're struggling with the concept of "Meta doesn't want the EU to come down on them." They will never extend the network in a way that breaks apps, and they can't extinguish it because both of those would make them "gatekeepers" under EU law - the thing they're trying to avoid.

        You have to understand that - as much as I dislike capitalism - it is what drives consumers. Linux is the better OS than Windows. That's proven by basically everything running Linux... except consumer PCs, which are usually Macs or Windows. Because Linux doesn't advertise itself like they do, not really.

        The way for the fediverse to grow is to get corporations to embrace it. The more corporations that embrace it, the less likely it is that any individual corpo can extend/extinguish (assuming they ignore the EU for some reason). Corporations means regular users, and regular users means normalization, which means a healthy and growing fediverse.

        Rather than trying to get a big place to reject this at all cost, maybe you should move to a small place like Beehaw that will more readily accept your worldview.

72 comments