• MashingBundle@lemmy.fmhy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    76
    arrow-down
    24
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Can someone explain to me why people are so violently opposed to this?

    If Threads blows up, and ActivityPub is integrated, you’ll have access to all of it through any federated instance. No need to let Meta sap all your data to view it or communicate with it’s users. Meta can’t kill ActivityPub or force us onto Threads, just abandon it and leave us back where we are today. If you don’t like the Meta users, just make or join an instance that isn’t federated.

    Anyone can scrape the metaverse data and use it for whatever, Meta included. Them implementing ActivityPub doesn’t change anything about that.

    Look I don’t like Meta as much as the next guy, but this all just seems like illogical gatekeeping

    Edit: I understand now, see: XMPP and Google. Good article someone replied to me with, down below.

    • Lemmypy@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      107
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Step 1: Threads starts federating with mastodon

      Step 2: mastodon users happily engage with threads, letting it become the biggest fediverse instance

      Step 3: threads stops federating with mastodon

      Step 4: mastodon users switch over to threads where all conversation is happening, leaving the fediverse deserted

      • Lee Duna@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        40
        ·
        1 year ago

        More than 5 million people signed up within hours, let’s assume they will have 30 million users by the end of the month. I’m sure there are Mastodon users will consider switching to Threads.

        https://www.marketing-interactive.com/meta-threads-garners-5-million-signups-in-first-few-hours

        And not to mention the Threads app is a privacy nightmare. I’m sure they can figure out any fediverse user, If fediverse server remains federated with meta server.

        One more thing, this mastodon server admin declined an invitation from meta

      • nave@lemmy.fmhy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        But Mastodon has less users than Threads already, if someone wanted to jump ship for more conversation wouldn’t they do it already? Heck, wouldn’t they have stayed on twitter?

      • SpicyTofuSoup@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Plus if all a lot of people who you follow are on threads then it might be a more attractive option to just switch platforms so you can see their content again after meta defederates

    • luckystarr@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      52
      ·
      1 year ago

      Burn me once, shame on you. Burn me twice, shame on me. Big corporations want mainly one thing: gobble up as much value exclusively to themselves. They will take whatever means necessary to get there. The strategies to privatize public resources (XMPP, ActivityPub, etc.) are known. They look great for the public on the outside, but over the years will erode the value for everybody BUT them. In order to not let it get as far, many (including me) are of the conviction to not even give them a finger, let alone the whole hand.

      • s08nlql9@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        not even give them a finger

        i’m willing to give them the “finger”

      • slicedcheesegremlin@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It’s only been a few hours and they already have more users than the entire Fediverse did during its peak by yesterday after all of this recent drama. We are already fucked, I salute every one of you as the fediverse sinks.

    • GunnarRunnar@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      I guess the fear (and probable strategy for Meta) is to first establish themselves as just a reliable instance with a closed app (Threads). From there, it’s a slow crawl to bring in the users, from outside but also from other instances. They have multiple tools for this: the infinite budget to develop Threads with exclusive features, just a better app, maybe influencer friendly ad models. The list is infinite.

      So where’s the rub? Meta is just introducing activity pub to more users.

      The problem is two step: They’ll eventually will lock in the platform from rest of the fediverse. It’ll might be years from now but it’ll happen (unless it’s killed first if course). This hurts rest of the fediverse by making it smaller: They will hook in users that would’ve otherwise chosen another instance and now are in Meta’s side fence which has turned into a wall.

      Note: Not an expert, I just like to speculate.

    • CALIGVLA@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think what people don’t want is the audience and culture that Threads is likely to bring to the fediverse, not so much Meta itself.

      • luckystarr@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The audience is not the problem. Meta’s mere presence on the network will be. We are now at a critical point in the struggle to survive as a network, and it’s not looking good.

        If we continue like today, the network effect (Google it) would eventually lead to ActivityPub being the de facto too-big-to-fail standard in all of the web. We aren’t there yet, though. Meta knows this too and doesn’t want it to happen, because extracting value from a diverse network is way harder than from a centralized user base. The fact that they even want to federate in the first place (shouldn’t be in their interest!) rings alarm bells.

          • luckystarr@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            20
            ·
            1 year ago

            Honestly, there isn’t much else we can do. Spread the word that there are better alternatives to Threads and don’t let them join us. If you prevent “If you can’t beat them, join them.” then that’s a step in the right direction (survival of the network).

            • Random Dent
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              16
              ·
              1 year ago

              I agree. There’s absolutely no way Meta is a good faith actor in this situation (based on, well, everything they’ve ever done up to this point) and if we give them an inch they’ll take the whole thing.

              The only thing to be done is an immediate, full−scale shunning by as many communities as possible. Make it abundantly clear that they’re not welcome here, and they can go lie in the cesspool they already made of traditional social media.

    • Deceptichum@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because history shows big tech companies fuck over competition and that competition is us, regular people.

      We’ve gone from not interacting with them to now being their rival and a direct threat to their profits.

    • picnic@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Do you remember what happened with gtalk and facebook messenger? They both were based on xmpp. After moving away from xmpp (what both did), I didnt have use for xmpp anymore. Honestly, Meta has given me no reason whatsoever in their whole record of existence to earn my trust.