308
Please defederate from threads.net
(aussie.zone)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 16 Dec 2023
308 points (88.5% liked)
Meta
595 readers
12 users here now
Discussion about the aussie.zone instance itself
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This elitism bandwagoning hurts the goal of providing alternatives to closed source proprietary platforms for social media.
If you want an open and viable alternative to proprietary platforms running social media then you must have a willingness to include those who want to be part of said platforms.
So you want an alternative to closed source platforms, but you want said closed source platforms to be the biggest on the fediverse. Uuhh, yeah...
It's only the biggest influence on specific instances, if the people in those instances engage with them.
The key difference is if you defederate just because "big is bad" ideology then the whole premise of federated services becomes irrelevant, because as soon as any instance gets too big it will be defederated.
You're missing the point, people don't want to defederate from threads just because it would be the biggest, but also because it's Facebook. How are people giving Facebook of all places the benefit of the doubt? This is insane. If they don't have an alteriror motive now, they will most definitely later.
It's pretty unbelievable isnt it? You would think this wouldn't even be up for debate on a platform like Lemmy but some people seem desperate for growth at any cost.
No you are actually missing the point. If you are on lemmy.your.opinion, then Facebook is not going to be the most prevalent voice unless the rest of the people on your opinion instance support the posts coming from Facebook.
That's why when you log into your instance, you mainly see feeds from your Instance. You cannot "game" an algorithm you don't control.
Your fear comes from the influence the mainstream social media platforms weld. And they weld it because of their homogeneous control over their platforms.
The more you try to exclude them the easier it is for them to exclude the smaller players.
You exclude Facebook, then Google, then Microsoft, then Twitter. Then they all band together to push out the rest of us and then you lose another open protocol to absorption or subversion.
I'll call it now, this is how it will go down. Just like all the other open protocols I've seen over the last 25 years... Technically savvy people push back on general adoption because we are generally snobs and elitists.
As far as I recall all these huge companies weren't excluded from these open protocols and now look at them. For instance - email, try hosting your own email server and see how quickly you will be filtered to spam on most email providers.
A perfect example of something being embraced by huge companies, then extended, and then finally extinguished and no longer viable to do by small parties.
Gmail even marks new Proton mail account emails as possibly "malicious", yet does not do this for their own service.
I literally host my own email without issue. And this thread is about defederating from a large company.
Literally the sentiment of this thread is about exclusion without reason beyond "big is bad" ideology.
So what the fuck are you talking about?
Well that was uncalled for.
I checked your replies and it's mainly rage posting and rage baiting.
Enjoy "debating" somebody else.
@The Lurker
If Marc Zuckerberg wanted to be part of a federated/distributed web, he could have done so with Facebook, Instagram, Whatsapp. This is nothing more than 'Embrace-Extend-Extingiush' activity.
Couldn't agree more. I fully understand that people don't like Meta, but closing people off doesn't make an open ecosystem, it just makes another closed one that fits a specific viewpoint.