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

Many of us do not trust Facebook and anything it is associated with or swallows up.

EDIT:

https://techcrunch.com/2023/07/05/adam-mosseri-says-metas-threads-app-wont-have-activitypub-support-at-launch/

"Instagram head Adam Mosseri said "

““Soon, you’ll be able to follow and interact with people on other fediverse platforms, such as Mastodon. They can also find people on Threads using full usernames, such as @[email protected].””

“We’re committed to building support for ActivityPub, the protocol behind Mastodon, into this app. We weren’t able to finish it for launch given a number of complications that come along with a decentralized network, but it’s coming,” he said.

“If you’re wondering why this matters, here’s a reason: you may one day end up leaving Threads, or, hopefully not, end up de-platformed. If that ever happens, you should be able to take your audience with you to another server. Being open can enable that.”

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    132 years ago

    I don’t want them commercializing the space. I feel as though we came here to get away from that. I fear an EEE tactic at worst, ads possibly showing in my feed at the least. But its not like we can’t defederate after launch if it is terrible.

    • BraveSirZaphod
      link
      fedilink
      52 years ago

      There’s no way to inject ads into your feed, except possibly by the admin of your own instance. Meta, or any other actor, could hypothetically use a bunch of bots to promote regular posts that are secretly ads throughout the Fediverse, but that would lead to them getting defederated very quickly by everyone else.

  • Ulu-Mulu-no-die
    link
    fedilink
    English
    4
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Yes please block them, I don’t want Meta poisoning Lemmy. If I wanted to see facebook content I would have a facebook account, I don’t.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    12 years ago

    I feel like this is entirely against Lemmy.world’s ethos of “a general-purpose Lemmy instance of various topics, for the entire world to use” (emphasis mine). I for one joined this instance exactly because they didn’t have a ban-happy federation policy like some of the other big ones. I understand people’s concerns, but if you want a “fuck corporations” walled garden instance, I feel like there are better homes for you somewhere else…

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      02 years ago

      Corporations offer the walled garden. Keeping them and their greedy growth-at-all-costs motives out of here would be better for the community. You have places to go to go enjoy those platforms already. Feel free to use them. Please don’t force them on everyone here where they aren’t generally welcome and where the communities here do better without them.

      We don’t have a lot of places to go to get away from them. And again, you can run to them and their platforms without pushing it on the rest of us.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 years ago

        I don’t think anyone is forcing anything on anyone? It just sounds like people like you and others in this thread want a more curated instance WRT federation, which I don’t think lemmy.world was designed to be (though I’m absolutely keen to be corrected if I’ve missed something in their policies).

        That’s the freedom of this platform right, being able to move around to communities that better suit the individual 🤷‍♂️ Not trying to flame and argument my friend, just sounds like there’s a more obvious answer.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12 years ago

          I don’t necessarily want much interference with content. Just defederate from known bad actors really.

          • pjhenry1216
            link
            fedilink
            22 years ago

            We have no evidence of bad acting in the fediverse from Meta. It’s all speculation at this point. And you’re changing your argument back and forth from poor content concerns to “meta is evil.”

            You’re asking for a better curated community in the end. If the content is bad or some other weird scenario occurs, then admins will act accordingly.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              12 years ago

              No evidence of bad acting from Meta? This is a joke right? If you think they will not do their best to pull the same bullshit they have pulled everywhere else you being a bit naive.

              I’m not changing my argument. I don’t generally want interference with content. BUT in the case of Meta, who is known to be awful, and have awful content, yes I argue that both are good enough reasons to not join hands with them.

              • pjhenry1216
                link
                fedilink
                12 years ago

                You literally misquoted me. I said no evidence of bad acting in the fediverse. Words have meaning. Don’t argue in bad faith.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  12 years ago

                  I’m not arguing in bad faith. They aren’t in the fediverse yet so of course there is no evidence here yet. I’m pointing out that you are putting your head in the sand and ignoring that Meta is a bad company, with bad intentions, and they will not change just because muh fediverse.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    62 years ago

    If they have any access to data through federation they could have just quitely made a small instance and stolen all the data. So while I 100% won’t be creating an account over there, and might block the instances myself, I don’t see the need to proactively do it.

      • pjhenry1216
        link
        fedilink
        12 years ago

        This doesn’t make the argument you think it does. This is an argument against Threads implementing ActivityPub. Everyone is complaining that it’ll be terrible content. And Google didn’t just do what Meta is doing. Google worked because they had their own ecosystem and had everyone join it. This article lacks a lot of the context involved and was just “big tech company joined a federated place and then left it and that killed that place.” That’s hardly the case. It’s more Google offering a different system. It would have happened even if they didn’t join XMPP. Apple hurt XMPP just as much.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -12 years ago

        Ya I hear that, and I have no interest in twitter or anything like it and don’t know how mastadon is used. So It could kill mastadon, but that could happen federated or not. If it does kill, You either die by the frustration when meta federatedly screws you, or by people just moving to threads. I don’t know which is more likely as I’m not versed in matadon.

        But I see no utility to lemmy/kbin from federation with threads, so sure block it. I’m not seeing the doom for lemmy/kbin though, unless they make a clone of us next. Then I’d block them, because they could do the evil.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    272 years ago

    Please don’t federate with Meta. You can guarantee they’ll ruin all that is good about the fediverse.

  • Arotrios
    link
    fedilink
    192 years ago

    It’s starting to look like the capacity for a user to independently defederate their content from specific platforms is in order. Even better would be the capacity to select what specific content is federated where when publishing.

    I personally want nothing to do with Meta, but I’d prefer to have the choice rather than having it made for me by the admins.

      • pjhenry1216
        link
        fedilink
        12 years ago

        ActivityPub does support that concept. The server and UI need to implement it though.

    • pjhenry1216
      link
      fedilink
      -32 years ago

      This is virtually impossible. The amount of processing power to do that would grind any server with more than a handful of people to a halt.

      Best case scenario is hoping Lemmy servers has the same capabilities as other ActivityPub servers. You can make it so Threads can see the server but the server can’t see Threads. In those scenarios, even if they reply to your post, you won’t see it.

      In any case, if you want to choose who you federate at a user level, create your own server. You can easily federate with who you want at that point. By being on another server, you give the admins some control. That’s an agreement you made when you joined a server controlled by someone else. There is very little stopping you from your own server. It can cost very little up front and after that, effectively just your own efforts to keep it running. You can be the sole user and make it fairly easily.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        12 years ago

        They will do 100% like that, that they spread everywhere but the posts on threads are only from threads

      • Arotrios
        link
        fedilink
        02 years ago

        It’s not a larger server load, because you’re actually publishing less as users defederate their content. The SQL is actually pretty simple if you have a content field for blacklisting that the user selects when publishing. On the federating front end, you simply don’t publish the content to the instance the user defederated from, as marked in the content field. It’s basically one more line in SQL - essentially would be something like:

        where content.blacklist != domain

        in the select statement.

        This is actually already in play to some extent over here at kbin, where @Ernest has made one helluva incredible engine - we’ve got domain level filtering for our feeds, and the search capacity is getting pretty cool. Having that same capacity for what we publish would make for an amazing platform.

        • pjhenry1216
          link
          fedilink
          -12 years ago

          You’re confusing blocking and defederation. You can already filter what you see as a user.

          • Arotrios
            link
            fedilink
            12 years ago

            No, this is talking about what you publish as a user, and choosing where it appears.

            • pjhenry1216
              link
              fedilink
              1
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              That’s not really how the protocol works though. You’re suggesting a major change to ActivityPub itself.

              Edit: and it’s a change that isn’t even necessary. It’s the whole reason you can create your own instance.

              • Arotrios
                link
                fedilink
                12 years ago

                It’s not a big change - it’s adding a field, a table, and a filtering line to the outgoing SQL select statement that chooses what a domain accesses when it requests the feed. Access level control has been a thing for content management systems for 20 years - this is not a big ask.

                But to be honest, as you’re the third person to have this misconception, I’m getting to the point where I’m almost tempted to crack open the kbin code and see if I can do it myself.

                • pjhenry1216
                  link
                  fedilink
                  1
                  edit-2
                  2 years ago

                  Again, you’re talking about changing the ActivityPub protocol. Objects aren’t published the way you think they are. It’s more like batch processing. This simply can’t be done at scale without massive investment.

                  Edit: ActivityPub is closer to an RSS Feed than it is to sending out what you publish to each server. It makes it’s lsit available to others (who don’t have this filter you’re talking about) and they grab the whole thing. They don’t scan each item and grab it as they go. And again, that scanning is done by them, not the hosting server. The feed is open by default. There is no real authentication and identity at the level you’d require to transform this into an entirely different product (a CMS).

    • vaguerant
      link
      fedilink
      12 years ago

      Your choice is in which instance you sign up to, meaning you find somewhere you agree with the admins’ choices. If your views are so unique that no such place exists, you start your own instance.

      • Arotrios
        link
        fedilink
        22 years ago

        Well, yeah, that’s how it works now.

        I’m looking at an improvement to the current system. Admin views can change, and in this scenario they’re a form of centralized power and responsibility. Delegating this particular power and responsibility to the user would remove the additional burden of moderation and allow the admins to focus on running the instance rather than policing the Fediverse.

        Giving users the choice of where their content is federated seems like a happy medium for all parties concerned. The admins don’t have to get political and the users can stay away from the Zuckening if they want to.

        • pjhenry1216
          link
          fedilink
          02 years ago

          This would be a mess to support on a server and I don’t blame anyone not wanting to pay to host that much wasted processing power. You can start a server for under $50. Admins have the power to do what they want on the servers they own. Federation works on a per-server basis. You can block who you don’t want to see. Some even allow you to block entire instances. But federation at the user level is ridiculous on its face and would require ridiculous server power.

          • Arotrios
            link
            fedilink
            02 years ago

            As someone who works with large data on a daily basis, no, it’s not.

            Gonna point you to my post here.

            • pjhenry1216
              link
              fedilink
              12 years ago

              I don’t think you read the comment close enough or all the way through. Blocking is not defederation.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      102 years ago

      Agreed. I am already blocking communities I don’t care for all the time but sometimes it would be much easier to be able to just block their entire instance (because the whole instance circles around the same type of content). I won’t be able to find one single instance the federated with just the right others for my taste so let me just filter myself.

      • vaguerant
        link
        fedilink
        -32 years ago

        You can’t have an instance that runs on your personal set of preference unless you run your own. Somebody else went to the effort of buying a domain, hosting, handling moderation on their own time, and everything else that comes with running a fediverse instance, so if you sign up to that instance, you get to deal with their rules.

        Even if you found an instance which suits your desires–which ultimately amounts to being essentially unmoderated, since you don’t trust an admin to be in charge of moderation–you’d find it getting defederated by other instances because bad stuff happens in unmoderated spaces. What you’re asking for, an instance which can access everything at all times, is fundamentally incompatible with the nature of the fediverse. I’m not being glib, but if that’s what you’re here for, you’re in the wrong place.

          • vaguerant
            link
            fedilink
            -22 years ago

            It sounds like you are, because if you want a place where you alone are in charge of what content gets blocked, what you really mean is a place where nothing gets blocked by the admins, so that it’s all up to you. If you want to be in charge of everything you see, all of that content must be allowed to reach the instance, i.e. it must be unmoderated and federated with everything.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              32 years ago

              I don’t get how you arrive at that conclusion. All I want is for me myself to not see certainty content I don’t care for. Here’s an example: there’s an nsfw instance that is federated with my instance. I don’t mind that at all. Great content for many people I am sure. But it seems to mostly be communities for straight men (or does into female bodies). I’m a gay man. I really don’t care for tits of any size. So I keep blocking these communities when their posts show up. Would be much easier if I could just block/hide the whole instance from my own feed.

              • vaguerant
                link
                fedilink
                12 years ago

                OK, I follow you now, sorry for misunderstanding. When you said “I won’t be able to find one single instance the federated with just the right others for my taste so let me just filter myself,” I took that to mean you wanted to start from scratch, rather than starting from a baseline moderation level you agree with plus your own filtering on top of that. That, I can certainly agree with (especially as a kbin user, where I have that capacity). I imagine it will come to Lemmy as well at some future date.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  22 years ago

                  Yeah all I meant was there won’t be a single instance that tailors exactly to my taste in content, which is fine.

      • pjhenry1216
        link
        fedilink
        52 years ago

        Blocking and defederation are not the same, just to note. If you block someone, I’m pretty sure they can still see your stuff. You just can’t see them. Defederation would actually stop them from seeing your stuff.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          42 years ago

          I don’t think that’s true, because we a world user I can still see things posted on Beehaw. They just can’t see anything I reply with. So, if our instance defederates from threads, we won’t be able to see their posts but they will see ours.

          • pjhenry1216
            link
            fedilink
            12 years ago

            That’s the behavior I mentioned in a separate comment that I suggested to be used. And it’s not defederation. Defederation means neither see each other (think TruthSocial not federation with anyone). It’s sort of like half defederated and I think it’s the best scenario if folks want Fediverse to withstand Threads. If Threads users never see somewhere else, they’ll just think Threads is all there is. Kind of how so many people think anything they find here is solely Lemmy. Mindshare is important and exposure is important. If Threads doesn’t moderate well enough, then full defederation may be necessary but it shouldn’t be done based on silly preconceptions and prejudices. See how it goes first.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 years ago

          I’m fine with that. I just don’t want to see certain content, that’s all. Maybe blocking is also the wrong word. Hide it from my feed is what I want.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          52 years ago

          Defederating doesn’t stop Facebook from seeing your posts. It stops you from seeing theirs. Everyone seems to have this the wrong way around

          • pjhenry1216
            link
            fedilink
            22 years ago

            You are correct. I did get it backwards in a few of my comments. Thanks for the correction.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    92 years ago

    There’s a tonne of comments saying about EEE but people need to be aware that EEE is famous for not being successful

    Microsoft themselves who coined the term gave up on the approach after a number of unsuccessful attempts

    • megane-kun
      link
      fedilink
      English
      72 years ago

      EEE not being successful doesn’t mean it doesn’t do any damage on its target.

      Microsoft might have given up on it, but that doesn’t mean that it haven’t done enough damage to cripple its targets.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -32 years ago

    I actually would prefer .world not block Facebook’s Threads. I have some accounts on other instances that will be blocking them, so I can switch to those if it becomes an issue.

    In any case, I think it’s a tough decision and I do like .world simply because of how open it is.

    I support either decision. I only just got here damn it lol

  • QubaXR
    link
    fedilink
    English
    192 years ago

    Please defederate from Meta while it is to our advantage.

  • Solaire
    link
    fedilink
    92 years ago

    i really hope we keep conglomerate out of the fediverse… they will commercialize it.

    • pjhenry1216
      link
      fedilink
      72 years ago

      That not really how the fediverse works. A server can defederate them, but there’s no way to keep them out of the fediverse as a whole. It’s somewhat antithetical to the core purpose behind the fediverse anyway. They can’t commercialize your instance.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        32 years ago

        I think most people believe that defederating means your messages stop going to Facebook when infact it’s the other way around. Only way to prevent Facebook from seeing what you’re posting here is if they defederate with us which probably is easy to accomplish by having content on your instance that’s agains Facebook’s terms of service and that you refuse to take it down even if they threaten to defederate.

        What defederating (if we do it) does achieve however is that it removes all Threads content from our communities which probably isn’t a bad thing either

    • Machinist3359
      link
      fedilink
      182 years ago

      Threads has 60 million users in 1 day, the fediverse has 12 million over years of growth.

      We’d be keeping ourselves out of Threads, not the other way around.

      • Maxcoffee
        link
        fedilink
        102 years ago

        They can keep their 60 million threads, most of that is complete trash anyway.

        • BraveSirZaphod
          link
          fedilink
          9
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          That 60 million includes the vast majority of people’s actual real-life friends and family.

          I know “les normies suck lulz” is a popular sentiment here, but I don’t think constantly harping on how much we hate the average person and find them to be trash is a particularly good way to create a positive and welcoming community.

          • Maxcoffee
            link
            fedilink
            32 years ago

            I don’t hate anybody but I do hate their random bad takes and opinions on things and I don’t care about their families either.

            • LousyCornMuffins
              link
              fedilink
              1
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              I hate Lindsey de Fournier but she knows what she did. Pretty much everyone else is cool.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            12 years ago

            This issue is less about accepting them, and more about preventing Meta and their scummy practices. I don’t want their hateful algorithms involved here. I don’t want their growth-at-all-costs mindset that will damage things more than any of their content will help. Whether the content has any value is a matter of opinion but my issue with this is that there are platforms for that kind of content already. If you want and enjoy it, go there. The fediverse so far doesn’t have the corporate evils permeating it, and very few communities online get to say that. No good can come from allowing meta in the door, and inevitably it will kill the fediverse in some form or fashion. People like to say “oh we can defederate later”. Later? When it is harder because now you have people hooked to the “content” coming from there? No, it’s best to never open the door in the first place.

            • pjhenry1216
              link
              fedilink
              22 years ago

              Their algorithm can’t apply here. It isn’t how ActivityPub or algorithms work. Their algorithm is per user. So that right there can’t migrate over. So a global algorithm which is way less useful is the only way. The only way to do that and have other instances ‘see’ it is to mess with the statistics. So they’d need to break spec. So if they do that (and destroy the ability to get user responses like upvotes and boosts for their native algorithm, ie make it less valuable to them) they’ll get defederated anyway. The argument here is just let’s see how it plays out. Literally nothing is lost by seeing what happens. If it’s a bunch of garbage, most instances will defederate anyway and no problem. There is no downside to wait and see.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                12 years ago

                I appreciate the perspective, but I still disagree on whether there is a downside. Waiting and seeing what happens with a group that is known to have malicious intent isn’t going to ever be a true net gain. So why wait and see? We all see enough from their platforms. Why invite that here at all? And once they are in the door I argue it’s harder to expunge them because now you have their end users in the mix crying out that they don’t want Threads defederated.

                • pjhenry1216
                  link
                  fedilink
                  12 years ago

                  Threads does have the chance to bring the fediverse into more mainstream acceptance. It may introduce users who wouldn’t otherwise know there are alternatives. The net gain may not be one for you specifically, but the concept as a whole. It may not do that, but it can. And the argument against waiting and seeing being Thread users making noise? That seems farfetched. They don’t hold leverage at all.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    692 years ago

    If we don’t defederate from the outset I’m just gonna join another instance that did. I didn’t sign up for Lemmy because I wanted fucking twitter.