this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2023
0 points (NaN% liked)

/kbin meta

38 readers
1 users here now

Magazine dedicated to discussions about the kbin itself. Provide feedback, ask questions, suggest improvements, and engage in conversations related to the platform organization, policies, features, and community dynamics. ---- * Roadmap 2023 * m/kbinDevlog * m/kbinDesign

founded 2 years ago
 

I would like to know if I can feel safe here, or if I should pack it up and start looking elsewhere sooner rather than later.

If the kbin staff have already made there intentions clear, please let me know.

(page 2) 26 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] sparseMatrix@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

@Roundcat

Meta is facebook who engaged Cambridge Analytica to purchase our lives.

Not from us, but from them. Facebook literally sold out the world

Facebook nearly destroyed this country for a buck.

Fuck facebook. I don't want to avoid federating because I dont want them around; I want to avoid federating because anything I can do to starve them of every resource for growth that I possibly can is the best thing I can do about facebook.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] wagesj45@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (5 children)

If you're truly worried about federating with Meta, you should probably also avoid all the other products they have their fingers in.

This includes all their web properties:

  • Instagram
  • WhatsApp
  • Onavo
  • Oculus VR
  • Beat Games
  • Kustomer
  • Lofelt

But this also includes many web technologies that are ubiquitous around the web. Meta has either created or contributes code and resources to:

  • React.js
  • MySql
  • Memcached
  • HHVM
  • Cassandra
  • Scribe
  • Hadoop
  • Hive
  • Apache Thrift
  • Varnish

I suspect you'll have a hard time finding any website on earth that doesn't use at least one of these technologies.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] techviator@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

A lot of the FUD regarding #Threads joining the #Fediverse has been put to sleep by #Mastodon on this blog post:
https://blog.joinmastodon.org/2023/07/what-to-know-about-threads/

"The fact that large platforms are adopting ActivityPub is not only validation of the movement towards decentralized social media, but a path forward for people locked into these platforms to switch to better providers."

Also @daringfireball made this blog post that I agree with:
https://daringfireball.net/linked/2023/06/19/not-that-kind-of-open

"the idea that administrators of Mastodon/Fediverse instances should pledge to preemptively block Facebook’s imminent Twitter-like ActivityPub service (purportedly named Threads) strikes me as petty and deliberately insular. I don’t like Facebook, the company, and I’ve never seen the appeal of Facebook, the product (a.k.a. “the blue app”). But there are literally billions of good people who use their services. Why cut them off from the open ActivityPub social world?"

[–] Fluid@aussie.zone 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

There are a lot of good reasons to not let corporate media join the fediverse: https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Rabbithole@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

We (meaning the whole fediverse, all instances) need to be de-federating that crap immediately.

Nothing good will come from having Facebook streaming into here in anyway whatsoever.

The Fediverse as a whole needs to be a separate place so that people can leave places like that.

Also, if Facebook is allowed to "work with" the development of the fediverse at all, they absolutely will eventually destroy it for profit. And "working with" it absolutely includes them federating with it.

When their vast resources are taken into account, and their existing userbase also, they would rapidly become the main instance (or collection of, but probably just one) of the whole fediverse. Once that's them, they can use that position to dictate terms pretty hard.

Before you know it, everyone that would eventually have come here are there instead, and they're now the fediverse. They can also fork the software and leverage their Dev teams to make their fediverse vastly more polished... No donations needed on their fediverse, less bugs, everyone you know is already over there... Seem familiar?

How does that effect us who aren't there, how isn't it just the same thing as now? Our fediverse dies off because the users leave, instances close down through lack of population/need, before you know it there's nobody here and the idea just dies.

Literally been done before. The playbook is absolutely common knowledge: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish

[–] HeartyBeast@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

The Fediverse as a whole needs to be a separate place so that people can leave places like that.

The beauty of the fediverse is precisely that it is not monolithic. Each instance can be different, have different policies and decide who it wants to federate with. Some instances will federate with anyone, some with most, some with a few, some with none.

The claim that that the fediverse needs to be a monolithic whole, where all instances walk in lock-step with each other is entirely at odds with the fediverse philosophy.

[–] Rabbithole@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

If this were just some problematic instance (or a group of them, even) I'd entirely agree with you, but this is Facebook, the damage that they're almost certainly planning and are entirely capable of requires (at least in my opinion), a different solution.

Please note that I'm suggesting this as an entirely unusual solution to a very unusual problem. Not as some sort of standard practice.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] duringoverflow@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

this argument makes sense only if you're talking about defederating instances. It doesn't make sense here. The problem is not whether we want the users of meta's instances. The problem is whether we want a huge corp be part of the fediverse. And why are we talking about it? Because people are trying not being naive and believing that meta is here because they liked the ideas of a federated network and want to participate. Meta will cause more harm than good as it has already happened in the past in different technologies/projects.

[–] masterspace@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The only thing naiive is the people in here thinking that defederating from Meta accomplishes anything whatsoever.

Oh boo hoo, meta's instance is shinier than ours, doesn't that mean users will leave? Yeah, look around, they already will and are leaving for Meta's platforms, they have more users on Threads in 24hrs than the Fediverse has had in it's entire life.

Nothing about defederating changes that.

[–] duringoverflow@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (3 children)

the defederation has nothing to do with "reducing meta's number". The reason to defederate is so you're not playing their game with their own rules. Fediverse will gain absolutely nothing by playing meta's game.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Perry@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Meta federating would be the best thing to ever happen to the Fediverse. Face it, Fediverse is not by its own in a billion years going to somehow kill off Meta. The vast, vast majority of users are going to stay with traditional social media, there’s nothing we can do about that.

However, Meta et al actually joining the Fediverse means we won. The vast majority will still stay with Meta’s services, but no one here has to. This is the closest we will ever get to a truly open standard for social media.

I don’t want to have an account with Meta or Twitter or whatever, but I, like most people, want to be able to communicate with the people who do.

As I see it, there are only two ways forward for the Fediverse:

  1. Traditional SoMe stays closed and inaccessible for anyone who doesn’t want to sell their soul to Meta. The vast majority of people still use traditional SoMe and the Fediverse stays a minuscule hobby project at best. Even here, most people will probably also have accounts on the traditional platforms in order to not cut oneself off from the world.

  2. Traditional SoMe embraces open standards and anyone who cares can choose to use whatever service they want. The vast majority of people still use traditional SoMe, but the Fediverse now has access to billions of people (or not, you can choose yourself) without having to become a commodity that Meta can sell to advertisers.

Ideally, instead of having to register a Meta account, I can just stay with Kbin.social without losing access to the content.

[–] Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Traditional SoMe embraces open standards

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHHAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Oh man that's a good one

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›