Basically this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish

First they will add loads of new users and become the dominant instances. Then, they will add their own proprietary features that other instances cannot support. Finally, their extensions become the new de-facto standard, marginalizing the original implementations.

Since Meta has proven itself to be an evil company that does not act in good faith, it is better to not federate with them from the start.

You forgot the biggest concern that people have.

Remember that Meta's strategy has always been to buy out or kill competitors before they grow too big. This time, when the competitor is immune to normal methods, they're all so friendly and cooperative. Why the complete 180, did they suddenly turn good?

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

Is your mind changed?

Did you ever hear the tragedy of Darth XMPP the Wise? It's not a story the Corpos would tell you.

Sorry, but I think you're missing the main point.

The risk is not to be tracked, the issue is embrace, extend, and extinguish (EEE): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish

They are currently competing with Twitter and Bluesky, they just need users to kickstart their new platform. That's where the fediverse comes in. All Meta has to do is to convince the instances to give them users.

Meta has a lot of money to throw at UX, they will design a better one than Mastodon. Their instance will also be more reliable (since they have money for lots of computational resources). This will allow them to spread their influence on the fediverse (so that people follow others on Threads), growing up to be the largest instance, and then just defederate from everyone else to “stop spam”. People will then move to Threads so they keep following their friends there (because their friends signed up for meta, since it was all compatible anyway).

And only then, they will start to harvest data and put ads in front of you.

these platforms have the know how to deal with spam and they will be incentivised to share that tech with other federated instances.

Based on what? These private companies aren't going to share anything because they owe it to their shareholders not to.

I dont think any of your points are wrong, it's just the association with Facebook people are anti. The fediverse has a great reputation for being completely removed from profit motive driven mega corporations. Facebook joining is gonna make people question the fediverse is my understanding.

these platforms have the know how to deal with spam

Lol they have the know how to generate spam.

The one thing I would worry about is that a massive deluge of content from Meta would drown out anything else from Lemmy, and would effectively reduce Lemmy to just a client for interacting with Meta. Unless an individual could block Meta specifically (or any one instance) it would effectively kill the All category.

Also would the flood of new traffic make it impossible for individuals to bear the cost of small instances?

That’s just what I think anyway. I’m not totally against federating with them, but very skeptical.

I've been around long enough to see many projects be extinguished.

To your first point, these companies essentially have infinite money compared to you, me, everyone combined on Mastodon. They can and will figure out a way to track you across servers and they will figure out how to exploit that. Cookies weren't supposed to be used for tracking they way they are, but the money hoarders figured out how to exploit them. Browser fingerprinting wasn't a thing, but it can now be used to track you. How you type and how you speak online can be used to ID you.

If you think that Facebook is willing to share anything, I just don't agree. Facebook will create Threads, they'll put it on the Fediverse, they'll align, then eventually they'll start building features that Mastodon, Lemmy, etc refuse to or literally can't or won't have the time to do, and then they'll start selling how they're so much better and you should come join them, or they'll say they're more secure, or they'll just smear the others. People will flock to the new and better, because hey it's still on the Fediverse and open, eventually they'll close it off and strangle the life out of the Fediverse. I'll still be on the Fediverse, but these platforms are all about content. If people stop showing up, they can still exist, but they're basically useless. It's happened before, it'll happen again.

I just wanted to chime in here and add this lame-assed meme template to things we should retire in the fediverse.

Aaron Crowder is a bigoted chode, and using him for your meme template only undercuts whatever point you want to make.

Find a new meme for this purpose. Let's do better.

I think this comic does a good job of illustrating one of the the issues. Facebook's business model is getting people to use their platform, then trapping them there and squeezing them for money. The Oatmeal - Reaching people

Remember how Facebook bought Oculus and people thought it was gunna be great because VR was finally getting really strong financial backing but they ended up just making their own VR walled garden that requires you to sign in with a facebook account and you are only able to selectively play with PCVR players if they allow it on their app store?

Facebook is reported to be using a shadow profile of non-facebook users. Mastodon stated that whenever you interact with a Threads user it will be recorded by Facebook. All they have to do is join a conversation as a lurker, and your data is sent to Facebook. Given a few more points such as time of day and topic they can start to narrow downwho you are. Add your profile picture, and manner of speech an AI, which they have a multitude of, can generate a probability of who is communicating. Over numerous interactions the law of six degrees of separation will have you nailed down. In some countries this is potentially a problem over data retention, but they'll have lawyers looking night and day for a way around those trifling laws. Willingness to federate might be seen as consent by default in some cases.

Pablo Escobar did a lot of great things in his local community. Many considered him a great guy. He's the Facebook of Columbia. Meta is a predatory shit company that would put everyone in a suicidal depression to make a dollar. At least Escobar's products had an up side for some people. Meta has no ethics. Only a fool invites a serial killer into their home because they like your new kitchen knives and want to have a look.

We should stop calling them Meta. You cant just change your name and pretend like nothing happened. Fuck em

Nice try Zucc. This just makes me want to defederate Threads even more.

I’ll give you an ELI5 answer:

Have you ever been playing with your same age friends and then a bunch of older kids come by and ask to join? You say yes and then they take over the field and ball and start playing the game they want and dominate the play. Pretty soon it’s the older kids’ game and you’re sitting on the sidelines.

24 hours after launch Threads is going to have twice as many users as the Fediverse, and their federation support is still months away (supposedly), so “bootstrapping their platform” is not something they need

It’s worth saying, though, that Threads hasn’t joined the fediverse yet. They could be pulling an Apple, who committed to opening FaceTime and changed their mind. Let’s see.

https://mb.com.ph/2023/6/21/meta-to-embrace-extend-extinguish-the-fediverse

Advertising to people currently on the Fediverse probably isn't their goal. Neither is just joining the Fediverse. Their goal is to become the Fediverse to swallow it whole.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish

They also have no incentive to share anti-spam tech. They would be giving up a massive sellin g point of their instance if they did.

Additionally, Threads is already stripping its implementation of ActivityPub of some features like alt text and CWs. Worse though is that they're removing the option for a chronological timeline, forcing their algorithm as the only option for its users. This would be fine, except it would also effect content on all instances (to an extent). Given that Threads will no doubt have a userbase larger than that of most instances, and that posts which play into its algorithm will show up for significantly more people, posts which engage with Threads' algorithm will be boosted more often, thus showing up for more people who aren't using Threads.

Say Threads' algorithm really likes posts that get lots of replies. Someone writes a controversial post on mastodon.social and lots of people on Threads immediately get in arguments in the replies. This post is then promoted by Threads' algorithm, causing it to be seen by more people on Threads. More eyes on a post means more likelihood of getting a higher number of boosts. Lots of accounts on Threads boost the post, which causes it to be seen by more people in federated instances. Again, more eyes means more likelihood of getting boosted. At this point the post is popular not just in Threads, but also in instances federated with Threads. Which means it'll pop up more often on other instances that do not federate with Threads. Threads' algorithm, only being implemented on Threads, extends its toxic influence out even to servers which refuse to federate with Threads.

Because it's Facebook. Fixing our buggy app? No, instead let's port those bugs to the desktop web site!

They're powerful but incompetent. FB even sent me a survey "why are you not visiting FB like you did before?".