The exchange is about Meta’s upcoming ActivityPub-enabled network Threads. Meta is calling for a meeting, his response is priceless!

    • Bloonface@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      For some reason, your link doesn’t work.

      The second part of your comment doesn’t answer my question, nor would “they want our data!!!” explain why Meta would want or need to create an instance in order to get it, or how the “data” (what data? Your posts? The ones that ActivityPub syndicates to hundreds of other servers automatically? Do you know exactly which servers your posts are on at the moment?) of other users on other fedi instances could somehow be “monetised” by them.

      • be_excellent_to_each_other@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Monetizing and controlling user experience is their bag, not mine. I don’t have an expectation of perfect privacy here, but neither do I have an expectation of being milked and corralled into funneling my entire life through the platform to be harvested, which is exactly the entire model of Facebook.

        Having Meta come in and be the 800lb Gorilla isn’t going to move things in any direction that is good. This isn’t some new company we know nothing about. We know everything about them, and we know above all else that the boundaries of what they are willing to do in order to monetize users is limited solely by what they are prevented by law from doing.

        Here’s a raw link without me trying to hyperlink off of regular text, hopefully that will work: https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html

        • Bloonface@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          OK, I’ve read that link and it still doesn’t really explain how exactly Meta intends to monetise other peoples’ posts - “collect data from and monetise”, how exactly are they going to monetise other peoples’ posts on other instances, when they have no ability to e.g. serve ads to those people?

          • be_excellent_to_each_other@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            1 year ago

            Well, it’s neither my desire nor my obligation to control your opinion on the matter.

            It seems a pretty clear strategy given literally every single thing we know about the company. They’ve got a bunch of well paid smart folks who do just that for a living. I don’t need to be able to predict their moves to have a sense of what they will push for. There is literally not one single example of them doing anything else as a company.

            • QHC@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I don’t think anyone is questioning your cynicism of Meta’s intentions or motivations, but the nature of the Fediverse is specifically designed to make it very difficult (if not impossible) for any one party to control the entire thing. It’s a question of how not if.

              The worst thing I could see is something like the development of React where FB has an overwhelming advantage in sheer resources and ends up having a major influence on the direction of software trends. But that would still just be a popularity thing and would not actively stop anyone from doing their own thing. Maybe there is something in the license for ActivityPub that would let them pull a Google-vs-Oracle reverse engineering, but again that won’t stop other instances or developers from ignoring them if they wanted.

              • ZeldaKnK@lemmy.ninja
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Here’s the rundown:

                1. Meta joins fediverse
                2. Meta introduces convenient, cool and innovative features not originally on fediverse code
                3. Everyone wants new features, but features are locked under propietary code.
                4. Everyone flocks to meta’s instance.
                5. Meta is now the fediverse and the fediverse is nothing but a husk of its former self
                • rbits@lemmy.fmhy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  What? Defederating doesn’t fix that.

                  1. Meta doesn’t join the fediverse
                  2. Meta introduces convenient, cool and innovative features not originally on fediverse code
                  3. Everyone wants new features, but features are locked under propietary code.
                  4. Everyone flocks to meta’s product.
                  5. Meta is now the fediverse and the fediverse is nothing but a husk of its former self

                  The solution is 1: to make sure users understand that it’s a bad idea to flock to meta’s instance, and 2: to implement that feature in the fediverse if everyone likes it so much they’re willing to leave. The solution is not defederating now because of the posibbilty that they do that in the future.

              • be_excellent_to_each_other@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Knowing they want to do it, combined with their track record, should be enough reason to resist. We don’t have to understand HOW to be wary of it.

                Edited to add - there is ample evidence it’s what they will do, and absolutely zero evidence that they intend to use us for anything but their own interests. It’s literally the one and only thing they have done as a company.

              • luckystarr@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                It’s not cynicism if the other party has a track record of behaving in an anti-competitive manner. The Fediverse became a competitor once it showed non-negligible growth.

                It’s not cynicism, it’s weariness.