• Aggy@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    I’ll edit this comment when I get to my computer to link to a great article about this and a history of companies effectively killing federated services .

    Edit: article here https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html

    But the main issue isn’t the data. It’s that when 99% of the users are coming through a company, they have too much power when it comes to updates. Meta can effectively control how the fediverse grows. And if they decided to defederate it’s the normal Lemmy and kbin users who are forced to use meta services to keep in contact with the same people

    • AuroraRose@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 years ago

      But here’s my thing with that argument, which is valid btw, but why would I want to keep in contact with the “head in the sand” people who continue using Meta’s instances (or whatever monster they end up creating)? I can’t imagine anything meta could offer me that would make me use their fediverse product. And the people that migrate over to them - okay? have fun supporting an evil corporation that’s using you as a money printer. Sayonara.

      • MudMan@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        I mean… because those people include all my friends and family? It was not a big problem to leave Twitter, which was used by only a couple of people and not exclusively. If there is an ActivityPub social media site where there is you guys and one defederated one where there’s all of them… well, I’m gonna go with them.

        Just so we’re clear, unless you make AP no longer open, defederating from Meta if they’re around here means they have the network effects, not Mastodon or the rest of the pre-existing instances.