this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2023
242 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

42341 readers
224 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] emi@lemmy.blahaj.zone 30 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

I think among other issues would be the Gmail-ification and iMessage-ification of the fediverse. What I mean by that is open standards like email are dominated today by many people using Gmail accounts as it is popular, “free”, and comes with a ton of features. Then google started “walling off their garden” by adding features that only work between gmail accounts. Similarly, apple also took the open standard SMS and started adding on features only available between other iPhones.

What we might see is some of the coolest features the fediverse has ever seen, but it will come at the cost of most users ignoring or dealing less with "irrelevant" things not on meta ran instances.

Hope we can resist such a change, but that is what I am concerned about.

[–] GoodKingElliot@feddit.uk 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Even though email is supposedly "open", and federated, is no longer is really the case. Big services like Gmail are suspicious of non-big-name servers, and often flag email coming from them as spam.

About a year ago I came across an article from a guy who'd been running his own email server since the 90s, and finally gave up. I couldn't find that article in my quick search, but I did find this:

https://twitter.com/greg_1_anderson/status/1425113874722820100

"I run my own email server. It's no longer a good idea, because the anti-spam arms race makes delivery from small independent servers very difficult, even when you keep yourself off the block lists, so it's a continuous struggle. Would switch, but I have too many domains/addresses"

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kool_newt@beehaw.org 15 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I sure hope there's a large group of servers that refuse to federate with servers run for profit. I didn't come to be a product and be manipulated with algorithms.

[–] noodle@feddit.uk 7 points 2 years ago (16 children)

I don't see anything inherently wrong with servers that try to generate some kind of income (servers don't pay for themselves after all) but it's absolutely the right of every server to choose whether or not to federate with them.

I'd take issue with free labour (e.g. unpaid mods) on a profit-making server.

load more comments (16 replies)
[–] emi@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Alternatively, imagine a world where the US government passed a "privacy bill of rights" and also required online platforms to be freely interchangeable via open protocols like ActivityPub.

Won't happen any time soon, and if you ask why, go read !news@beehaw.org for a little bit and come back.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 7 points 2 years ago

Wouldn't the EU be more likely to do that?

[–] heavy@beehaw.org 6 points 2 years ago

The bad news aside, I think "privacy bill of rights" is the right way of thinking to get people and tech to a happier place.

[–] PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 years ago (13 children)

I hate how it seems like anytime there’s an alternative to big tech, it gets immediately co-opted. Either by the far right or by corporations.

[–] christophski@feddit.uk 5 points 2 years ago

Capitalism gonna capitalise

[–] JaeSuis@beehaw.org 4 points 2 years ago

Capitalism only functions when it can absorb the things that can be an alternative to it.

[–] fckgwrhqq2yxrkt@beehaw.org 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Aren't those the same group?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] Mack@kbin.social 7 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I'm glad to see my server doesn't plan on federating with anything Meta hosts. I really don't like the 'wait and see' approach; Meta has shown its true colors time and time before, they have not earned their trust.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] RMiddleton@kbin.social 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

List of Fediverse admins pledging to pre-block Meta instances: https://fedipact.online

It will be possible to have accounts on multiple instances, those that block Meta or federate with Meta. Then see what happens.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ZILtoid1991@kbin.social 6 points 2 years ago (5 children)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] davidhun 5 points 2 years ago (8 children)

What iffing a possible scenario: Meta positions itself as an instance host, like how WordPress hosts blogs. "We'll take the headache out of setting up an instance, but you control everything else!" Free? Low cost? Removing the technical hurdles of hosting your own instance could entice a lot of would be admins to go this route.

It gives the illusion of control, but Meta still back channel collects all data.

[–] Satiric_Weasel@beehaw.org 4 points 2 years ago

My money says you're right.

Time to learn how to host your own instance everybody.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 years ago (6 children)

If it begins looking that way, the (m/f)etaverse could always be defederated. There's no reason we need to connect with them.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] reksas@sopuli.xyz 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Meta can never be trusted for anything. This could very easily be them trying to make tools to snuff out our "rebellion".

[–] kool_newt@beehaw.org 4 points 2 years ago

I will remove myself from any servers that federate with Meta.

[–] noodlejetski@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago (16 children)

apparently some Mastodon admins got contacted by Meta and met with them after signing an NDA. I'm quite surprised how many Masto admins want to "just wait and see, maybe it's not gonna be that bad".

[–] BlackCoffee@kbin.social 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

"Meta and met with them after signing an NDA"

This should tell quite enough.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)
[–] 0xtero@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (4 children)

Meta should be considered "harmful to humankind" (the list of atrocities is long) and I personally really don't want anything to do with them.

It was only matter of time before one of the big players took interest. Too bad it had to be Meta, but I don't think the others would have been much better.

The protocol itself isn't secure, so if anyone is worried about data harvesting, better log off now and never return. Meta and anyone else can do that already (and is probably doing) without having to roll in with their own instances.

Federating with someone who might have 1.2 billion MAUs is kinda scary because most protocol implementations (like Mastodon) are huge mess of bloat and inefficiencies under the hood. Someone paying their hosting out of their own pocket or trusting on kindness of strangers should be wary of the amount of data that's going to hit them with federation.

It's probably silly to expect "unified blocklist". Some people are fixated with the idea of growth and equate mass popularity with success. Others would rather "wait and see". Let them. The fediverse used to be much more homogeneous place 3-4 years ago, but we're nearing 10M users. That's simply too many people and voices for there to be just one response.

Luckily there doesn't need to be. The protocol allows for creation of spaces that don't have to interact with Meta.

[–] VanillaGorilla@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago

The protocol itself isn't secure, so if anyone is worried about data harvesting, better log off now and never return

I'm more concerned about tracking tbh. But it's good to know they're planning to get a piece of the cake. I'm ready to block them.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›