Dear server admins, please defederate threads.net. Dear users, ask your server admin to defederate threads.net.
Meta just announced that they are trying to integrate Threads with ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, etc.). We need to defederate them if we want to avoid them pushing their crap into fediverse.
If you're a server admin, please defederate Meta's domain "threads.net"
If you don't run your own server, please ask your server admin to defederate "threads.net".
998
Comments793
Yeah dude let’s just federate with an instance maintained by a corporation that has undoubtedly caused a genocide in Myanmar by turning a blind eye to a far-right hate speech group that caused an entire fucking minority to flee into another country.
I don’t get why people are supporting and saying “oh it must be up to the user” like bro this is the company we’re dealing with. Fuck that fuck threads fuck zuckerberg i don’t want his shit cancer near something that’s going well so far.
lemm.ee already made the decision, based off of the voice of the community to defederate from Threads
Lemmy.Ca admins blocked Threads about 5 months ago: https://lemmy.ca/comment/901551
You can confirm that Threads dot net is still blocked by Lemmy.Ca by going to https://lemmy.ca/instances and clicking on the "Blocked Instances" tab.
Thanks, I actually forgot that one can check!
lemmy.dbzer0.com also blocked Threads
please take a look at the replies under zuck's own post in threads.net and determine if that's the type of content you want.
for those who don't want to visit, majority of the commentators are bots. some advertising crypto, and others asking for money.
even if you think you can individually block those accounts, keep in mind the size of threads compared to fediverse.
for Lemmy: monthly active users are barely
150K40K, while for threads it's 100 million. there's no chance you can control that inflow of bots.and if it still doesn't convince you, you can read threads' privacy policy, which states that they'll gather all that pii if you interact with their content.
most of the internet is already bigtech, I don't want Lemmy to become another arm of it. though I have faith in my instance maintainer and dessalines, the dev.
Comment stolen from user "copygirl" from blahaj.zone:
Let users decide because we’re fucking adults.
Great thing about the fediverse
People get to decide what they want from their platform
Surely you're aware of the embrace, extend, extinguish corporate strategy.
People only get to decide what they want from their platform until facebook starts extending the spec. Then your client will become incompatible with some posts, and so on and so forth.
In summary, it's a threat to the platform itself.
Exactly, I hereby decide that I would like to ignore corporate efforts to undermine this burgeoning new platform. I furthermore reserve the right to complain about the loss of said platform in future years by claiming that it's everyone elses fault for allowing corporate encroachment.
think jerboa lets you block instances
Yeah dude let’s just federate with an instance maintained by a corporation that has undoubtedly caused a genocide in Myanmar by turning a blind eye to a far-right hate speech group that caused an entire fucking minority to flee into another country.
I don’t get why people are supporting and saying “oh it must be up to the user” like bro this is the company we’re dealing with. Fuck that fuck threads fuck zuckerberg i don’t want his shit cancer near something that’s going well so far.
Imagine thinking Myanmar is facebooks fault. Wow.
Read up rookie
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/09/myanmar-facebooks-systems-promoted-violence-against-rohingya-meta-owes-reparations-new-report/
https://archive.is/6rZ77
https://thediplomat.com/2020/08/how-facebook-is-complicit-in-myanmars-attacks-on-minorities/
I don’t know what version of reality you live in but i hope these articles are illuminating
That one is actually public record, with
Facebook using their influence to set up in the country in a way that made it the dominant form of internet access for the country, enough that a large number of people considered Facebook=internet
Facebook getting multiple reputable warnings about what was happening on the platform, what their advertising policies and algorithms were encouraging, and they chose to not act on them and instead continued to profit from it
They finally did act after a whole lot of harm was done
Their direct fault? No. But they sure as fuck share a lot of the blame in pouring gasoline on the fire.
Because it was totally and we have the receipts? Imagine being that ignorant of world events.
Then go join threads.net? Nobody's stopping you from doing that. That would put you on a server friendly to your beliefs.
Server admins also have opinions, and are not required to take a democratic vote and each individual user's choice into account. They can decide for themselves, and they will, for good or ill. If you don't like where it ends up, your user decision should be to fuck off to threads.
You have the full right to decide, you can switch servers to one that chooses to, or open multiple accounts. That's your choice. This isn't Nostr, in the Fediverse instance blocking is normal and it happens without your input, but you know what does happen with your input? Registering your account on a server that fits your needs best, or as close as possible.
Generally, yes. Perhaps unpopularly, I don't need to decide about suddenly having meta content in Lemmy. I expect that's not ever gonna happen.
Having Elongated Musk or Fart Suckerberg in my stream cannot be the default, but at best, opt in.
This is why I don't understand all the hysteria about this.
If I don't want to see Threads or I don't want Threads to see me, I can go to a Threads account and click "block threads.net".
But obviously that's too complicated and it's easier to just whinge to your instance admin about how Threads federation will be the death of us all. 🙄
This. Imagine begging daddy admin to protect you from mean Meta.
In favor of defederation. If I start seeing garbage from threads in my feed, I'm switching instances. I don't want Meta pushing their divisive, hateful, misinformation all up in my feeds. Meta will kill fedi. We don't need them.
If anybody remembers XMPP being widespread and what Facebook, Google, Apple and others (say, I personally remember VK and Yandex in Russia supporting it) did to it, that's what will happen if you "wait and see".
EDIT: oh, half the thread is such comments
How to kill a decentralized network (such as the fediverse)
Currently, I think there are two main branches of ActivityPub implementations: Microblogs(Mastodon and its forks, the microblog portion of kbin), which are user centric, and group based aggregators(Lemmy, Kbin, peertube, future Pixelfed), both of which are valid implementations, however, they don't really work well with each other.
So, I believe that the threat of Threads to Lemmy instances is really overblown for the simple reason that there is no way for a Lemmy user to browse microblog contents through federation to begin with, whether it be Mastodon or Threads.
Kbin actually does let you look at and browse microblogs as well as threads.
You mention kbin/mbin, but you do not understand its power!
https://lemmy.world/comment/5715981
This person who responded to me didn't think so. Maybe you can talk to him about it.
If anything meta integrates here I'm out.
Let's not defederate from every corporate player. Some of them can probably respect reasonable rules of civility.
But fuck Meta. We already know how this plays out.
We know there's a huge wave of hatred and misinformation incoming. We've seen it on their other platforms.
Okay. I’ve seen stuff like this on both mastodon, and here, but i haven’t heard about them doing anything that would actually harm the fediverse. I guess i don’t know what the problem is. I know they’ve got a negative reputation, and for good reason, but isn’t that the awesome part of threads being federated? We can follow and connect to people there without being part of their system, and therefor not susceptible to their bs? If I’m missing something please fill me in.
I just don’t think it’s possible for something to kill the fediverse. And if it is possible, then it is a flaw in the design of the fediverse and needs to be fixed.
Are you planning to pay for the extra bandwith to deal with all the additional traffic?
Meta will.
And then when they own the servers amd all the traffic, lemmy will be quietly murdered.
Quietly, because they'll control the traffic, and therefore the narrative
Today no.
Come make your instance on Meta(tm) it's free(tm)!! Its fast! It's yours!!
Then later they'll wreck havoc on our small servers making them slow and unreliable, making their servers even more interesting for people. And so on.
And that's just one way among lots of ways.
I love that your fear is they will be successful and the lemmy devs and admins don't have their shit together or a plan to handle anything but a small niche headcount.
All activity pub needed to do was create a user rights guidelines that prevents profiting off the data. Meta wouldn't have touched the Fediverse with the 10-foot pole, if that were the case.
Lololol and what legal mechanism are you going to use to enforce that?
ActivityPub is a protocol, not a fucking organization. It literally has no agency.
You can licence a protocol
ActivityPub can't license anything. When you identify actual human beings in this conversation, perhaps you might have a point. So far you don't.
First off, calm the hell down. You're being needlessly antagonistic.
Secondly, it seems like the W3C is the publisher of the activity pub standard seems like they ducats what is an isnt compliant.
Seems like of was specifically authored by a team including Evan Prodromou according to the wiki.
If they wanted too, but like literally and open source software, it could have been given licencing requirements
Specifically, my research has turned up that implementations of these protocols can be licensed. Threads' version of ActivityPub likely has its own licence. I think it would be safe to say that the creators of Lemmy and Mastodon specifically could have privacy rights dictated within their license implementation. That would nullify threads legal capabilities.
People have been writing about this ad nauseum. It's the embrace, extend, extinguish strategy. Join fediverse, extend the spec with so that not all clients are compatible with all features, repeat as necessary until everyone is using your client, finally drop compatibility with other clients.
My sweet summer child.
With a network that big, they have to be very careful, and really try, if they don't want our servers to just go kaboom.
Or we just defederate from any of those attempts.
Give https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html a read. Might sway you, might not.
This is an excellent point. Thanks!
in that case considering meta is saying that it would take nearly a year to federate the platform we probably should defederate them.
What point in that linked blog swayed you? The circumstances are quite different. XMPP was dogshit when Google started working with it. ActivityPub is light years ahead.
I really don’t know enough to say one way or the other, but the fact that this is an established Microsoft practice swayed me. I can actually believe google didn’t intend to do what it did to xmpp as a log of google employees from the 2000’s speak highly of the company, but these executives are traded like nfl players, and i know enough about meta’s history to believe they may do this. Besides I’m still new to development, but i don’t see many other reasons why it would take meta nearly a year to fully launch federation.
Actually this just occurred to me, but isn’t it interesting which accounts were linked first?
Triple-E predates Microsoft. IBM was doing it before Bill Gates was a twinkle in the mailman's eye.
Just think:
Meta has literal billions of users.
The entire fediverse has about 1.5 million.
Less than a fraction of a percent.
Why in THE FUCK would meta notice, or care, at fucking all? The entire fediverse of traffic ported over to meta wouldn't budge their advertising bottom line.
But, it's a comparatively small group of smart people, having conversations, and profiles they don't have tabs and near total control over.
There's news about cop city and gaza I have seen here that I've seen NOWHERE else.
Don't let them control the narrative here
Well, then, let’s make our point I’ll just email the holders of the instances I’m on and let them know I support defederating threads
Why do people ask rhetorical questions without following through?!
This is a question that should be asked. If, indeed, the fediverse is so unimportant WHY THE FLYING FUCK IS META INTERESTED IN FEDERATING WITH IT!?!? THAT is the question people should be asking, given that Meta does nothing that isn't designed to add more money to Zuck the Fuck's portfolio.
And yet … most people (for clarity, I don't mean you here!) don't ask that question. They don't take that question you ask and wonder beyond that first kneejerk level. Use that question instead as a "LOL Meta doesn't care about the fediverse" piece of evidence.
And this is why we can't have nice things.
The fediverse is an emerging threat. It's not ready yet, but it's on the right trajectory. Every time there's angst on some other platform, the fediverse get's a bump. Fediverse is not a real competitor yet, perhaps it never will be, but for meta it's sensible to establish a presence here in the short term, because it may be much more difficult later.
There is one big reason why they would care - antitrust and EU regulation protection. They have no intention to destroy the platform Rather they want to please the regulators as they are leveraging the open standards. The EEE strategy is a conspiracy theory. Government regulations are the most probable reason for this change.
Dude, even if it isn't straight out EEE they'll just drown us, and eventually kill us because if whatever reason. It doesn't even have anything to do with Lemmy, they have to manuver carefully if they want to let us live.
Do you have a Lemmy server that can take the load off of a billion user network? I have one and it for sure can't.
Your server has users that all follow every single user on the entire fediverse? I will admit, that'd be a real concern in that case, but it also sounds a bit weird. What kind of users do you invite to your instance? O.o
If 99% of the network is meta (probably more) then every user will follow stuff on meta instances, instances like Reddit, will have an enormous load of content. You don't need "everyone following everything" to get that, just imagine a "Reddit all" instance it will bring any small network to its knees.
It's all in the numbers, and the usage IMO. I don't want 10000 soul less posts a day, I want to see what people are up to, working on etc. those concepts are quite incompatible, at least on Lemmy because we are just small servers, not a uniformed giga billion network.
That's not how it works.
Threads doesnt have that much users I think. Fb, insta and whatsapp do have a lot of users but I dont expect a lot of users comming from there
But that's good. Meta doesn't care about Lemmy or Mastodon because they're tiny. Threads is a threat to Twitter. They want to integrate with Mastodon just because Twitter doesn't. That's it.
They're not going for "total control" of your conversation about Gaza. You are not important to them. You are not the main character in some David and Goliath story. There are only Goliaths.
Do you know why Facebook paid a billion dollars for Instagram? Instagram wasn't worth that much. It wasn't generating a billion dollars in revenue. It probably still doesn't.
Facebook bought Instagram because Instagram was a growing app that was popular with a demographic Facebook wanted to control. They spent a billion dollars to eliminate a growing threat.
Mastodon and, to a lesser extent, Lemmy, represent a growing threat. Not a very big one right now, but it could become a bigger one. It could become another billion dollar problem for the goliaths on the Internet, in a few years. They need to have total control, if a social media app starts to fragment it just collapses instead as users decide to go wherever the other users are.
Facebook's 1000:1 user ratio would make Lemmy irrelevant and stave off that billion dollar problem for Facebook down the road. An incredibly cheap way to kill a tiny but growing competitor.
That’s the case whether or not you federate with Threads. But if you do, that’s not going to matter because you can freely communicate with people on Threads.
They don't want to federate because Twitter does not.
But neither to "extinguish" Mastodon or so. They need it as a defense like Google uses Mozilla, showcasing that not only do they enjoy competition, they in fact actively support it, by making their content available over there, too.
Because like you say, the entirely metaverse is so tiny compared to meta, thy could not give a flying fuck whatever the reason if it's about anything competitive. But they can utilize the tiny underdog as a shield from criticism. And that's valuable to them.
Meta will be okay making money off lemmy indirectly for a while. Then, if they grow, they'll want more than a toehold.
When it's Facebook, trust that greed and power are the goals.
People are concerned because there were examples of such things going horribly wrong, most notably with Google and XMPP.
Way back in the day, Google announced that its Talk messenger will support XMPP, which made decentralization fans very happy - finally, they can communicate with everyone from the comfort of their decentralized instance!..oh.
Google started implementing features in Talk that are incompatible with XMPP, and then dropped XMPP support altogether, ending up deprecating Talk in favor of Google-only Hangouts. This forced many XMPP users to get into Google's ecosystem, since the people they contacted through XMPP were mostly just using Google Talk, and they couldn't be contacted through XMPP any more. As a result, XMPP became worse off than it started and got practically forgotten by all but 1,5 nerds who keep it alive.
now most of their contacts were in defederated Google to which they now didn't have access.
this ☝️. Those of us who remember what happened then, understand the potential dangers of federating with a juggernaut like META.
We should tread lightly!
Xmpp's popularity isn't the point.
The point is google intentionally killed it
Also, I doubt that Google wanted to destroy XMPP. They simply needed a chat then noticed it's crap for mobile devices. They wanted to offer their users seemless migration to the new proprietary protocol.
I was sad that Google stopped to use an official standard, but there are many better free options left.
XMPP works great on mobile devices today. Google could have easily developed and published such extensions themselves.
Not even a little bit. XMPP was rubbish.
Why? It works great for me and my contacts. I use it for all my personal messaging.
When Google started using XMPP in Talk, 20 years ago, it was crap. I haven’t used it in probably 15 years but it wasn’t great then either.
Then it must have gotten a lot better in the meantime then. I discovered it ~2020 while searching for alternatives to WhatsApp and realizing that other walled gardens cannot be the answer since they have the same problem as WhatsApp. I think we should revive the idea of an universal internet standard for instant messaging.
No it's not in the least bit, but because people keep reposting that angry blog post by someone who was personally involved and wanted someone to blame so they blamed Google (as if XMPP needed any outside help to fail to catch on, they could do it on their own perfectly fine), people believe that narrative and then get sold on Meta wanting to the same with the Fediverse. As if they could give a flying fart (just like with Google and XMPP).
This. I don't care what Google or Meta do, I will never use their services.
@Creatortray
You've just written it : their negative reputation for easaly understandable reasons. We can already foresee Threads will very soon be used to spread the most toxic campaigns on the net and that will undoubtably harm the Fediverse. One of the most valuable trait of the Fediverse is its decentralization and consequently, the potential accountability of any server administrator. Why should we take those risks when it's so easy to avoid it? #BlockThreadsOut
@mypasswordis1234
@Nelfan @Creatortray @mypasswordis1234 if my server federates with #Threads and it creates a problem, I’ll stop supporting it and move to one that doesn’t.
@boiglenoight @Nelfan @Creatortray @mypasswordis1234
Great toot, Nelfaneor, but to use the word 'risk' with respect to the probability of #falseBook creating harm in the #fediverse network, is a mistake — it is a "certainty".
Boiglenoight if you value the free and open web we have news for you, your instance is having its HTTPS intercepted by Cloud(G)lare (change 'G' to 'F'). Move to a different one, if you want us to continue dialog with you.
It'll be successful and the current devs will lose the ability to unilaterally control the project.
So competition, that's what they are afraid of.
We should avoid making blanket demands like this to the fediverse as a whole. I happen to support your position, but we should take into account the diverse nature of the social web.
Instead of making demands, explain your reasoning and leave each community to make up their own mind. This is the beautiful nature of the social web; we have broken decision making down into many smaller units instead of one mega instance/corporation.
Find a community that resonates with your own thinking on this issue, and over time a thousand different servers will gather experiences and a picture will start to form; was federation with Meta a good or a bad thing?
There's a list of people that have agreed to block it at https://fedipact.online/
That site is an assault on my eyes.
Graphic design is my passion.
Web 1.0 always was a good lookin kid
The design convinced me to give meta a chance.
Oh jeez how do I turn off all the moving stuff
0.19 allows users themselves to block instances...
True
Meta is a threat to the platform though.
They are a threat to humanity as a whole
So do preemptively defederate when any corporation makes a new instance?
I've seen strong support for Tumblr federation adoption, so no. Context is important.
How about users make decisions for themselves and block Threads if they want?
What exactly is "pushing their crap"? Chances are it will be more moderated and less arbitrary than what passes through from some lemmy instances. Hatred and misinformation? Harvesting your data? Like this isn't already a factor with lemmy? In the Fediverse, we have admins who flagrantly break their own TOS. Plus it seems to me this is an opportunity for lemmy to get advertisement at Threads' expense.
If you don't subscribe to threads you'll never see it.
Because threads doesn't have communities. All threads people can do it comment.
They can post to communities by mentioning their handle, mastodon users do it all the time. They're certainly not going to be as much of a problem for us since it's a deliberate process, but it's also not that far fetched that users will sign up there to abuse it, especially if threads has poor moderation (it's not looking good as it is).
will i see (negative) culture change
Undoubtedly.
Great and such, but the large majority that might come to the Fediverse will never look nor use that function. If we don't defederate with our instances now, we never will.
The thing you don't get is that more common people will find the lemmy servers for the first time. Additionally it is more of a Twitter clone and doesn't threaten much.
What do you mean by "find Lemmy servers?" I mean, can you describe how that will look like from the perspective of someone that is using threads? And how that will motivate more common people to change the platform or browsing behavior?
Lemmy.world is a server running lemmy software. It's federated so you can subscribe to lw communities of Mastodon and comment as well. Threads and Mastodon don't support communities though so all they can do is subscribe and comment. There is no negative to lemmy servers of Threads being federated. Threads users will subscribe to lemmy communities, but stay on Threads. If you're on a lemmy server it doesn't change anything. You'll just see posts and comments with accounts ending with @threads
From my understanding of your earlier comment you said casual Threads users will find out about Lemmy servers for the first time and I asked about how that will work out from the perspective of a threads user. I hoped for an answer of that.
Exact same experience as a Mastodon user.
*everyone doesn't
Defederation is cancer and it will kill Fediverse faster than any Meta.
Aside from the "moral" argument, can someone ELI5 what harm can a federated threads.net do on other users (like me) and/or instances?
I can kinda see the point, but also without providing actual reasons, this post just seems like a LARP.
Oddly, this may well be what really spurs on decentralisation. I suspect more and more individuals, or small groups, will spin up their own instances rather than all gravitating to the bigger ones, due to issues like this.
Because, ultimately, the more tech-savvy users (the ones more likely to be into the Fediverse, anyway) will want to decide for themselves what content they do and don't see.
And it's nothing to do with whether or note someone likes/trusts Meta. It's people being able to make their own decisions on what content they want to be able to follow and not have it decided by someone else based on their interests. If someone's friends/family/fandom has a heavy Threads presence, they can spin up their own instance and be able to follow that content themselves without it really affecting anyone else. (and without having to sign up to Threads themselves...)
Well, I said before I'll leave any servers that federate with Meta, and it's looking like that time.
I hate Zuck and Facebook as much as the next person, but I think the rollout is going slowly enough that we don’t need to fight about it yet.
The discussion is important and needs to be had, but it’s premature.
Is threads.net going to hit the top of "most defederated" list? People hate it even more than gab and truthsocial.
I'm not too worried about Threads joining the metaverse. What Mark Zuckerberg has failed to realise is just how barebones his Twitter clone is.
Mastodon has support for trending topics and hashtags. Threads doesn't. Lacking such an absolutely basic feature that any microblogging platform would otherwise support is why Threads dropped from 500M active users to just a fraction of it.
I joined it near launch, made a few posts and then stopped. There is nothing worthwhile on Threads and I don't think leeching on to the fediverse.
Also, I can kinda understand why you all rushed to defederate from Gab when they tried to jump on the federation bandwagon, but not Meta.
Zuckerberg doesn't need us to overtake X. He needs to actually make a functional social media app first, then put more resources into moderating it.
X is still on top despite Elon Musk's stewardship because his competitors are either too small (most federated instances), require too big of a technical hurdle for the average Joe to use (the fediverse in general), or are downright incompetent (Threads.)
@mypasswordis1234 I mean, what is the point in defederating while being in a Lemmy instance? You cannot interact with microblog while using #Lemmy. The only thing that comes to my mind is that threads users will not be able to comment on a lemmy post or comment, but let's be honest, the way communities will probably federate to #threads (the same way it is today with mastodon*) is not good, thus reducing the amount of attraction a lemmy post can get over there.
Too bad people on mastodon don't have the ability to block an instance they find objectionable for themselves-- oh wait.
Not sure about Lemmy, but we can do this on mastodon. I don't need someone else deciding for me.
Tldr? Couldn't disagree more
That's the face you make when the hamster in your ass sneezes.
That is beyond offensive. As a butthole hamster shover upper, I refuse to be brought down to Zuck's level, there aint no way possible we ( hamster asshole stuffers) should be dragged through the mud and besmirch our good name. Let the robot lizard people keep him. Harumph...
Could threads generate so much data that it costs to much to keep an instance/server running?
In my opinion all big player are just federating to destroy the fediverse or take it over. Why else would they be here? There is just no need for them to be here exept to kill competition before it gets to big.
Honest discourse for the purpose of highlighting any possible issues and fortifying against the EEE process. (Prepare for war; hope for peace):
Let's say they were able to join... (We should at the very least go over this possibility, as it can also help our admins decide.) How would we be able to protect our network?
Would making sure any features of one instance/app be open and able to be modified and/or gracefully integrated into another be an option? (similar to the GPL license) An example would be keeping a party from restricting access to a private network only through their app. (looking at you, gTalk and iMessage)
Any other suggestions?
Better yet, let them enjoy the full connectivity for a month. Once they've enjoyed all the awesome content and got used to it - defederate.
lemmy.world and by extension mastodon.world is probably still waiting to see what happens. The other instance I have my account on has a rather hands-off approach to moderation soooo I hope there's some way for a user to block an instance on their own.
"Everyone everywhere should federate."
"Not like that!"
By all means, fuck Meta to the moon and back, but for goodness' sake, users on federated servers can choose to block the domain with the same result, not to mention that admins can simply restrict it (see social.coop/@eloquence/1115888…). It just isn't so black and white as people are making it seem.
Federation with a bigger platform is realistically the only way for Fedi to become mainstream, and at the moment Meta seems at least to be trying to be communicative. And with their quite unvaluable userbase they really don't have enough leverage against the privacy-concious Fediverse to turn AP into MetaPub. For now.
Why? This sounds like FUD.
I’m against the defederation. The internet and the www are based on the idea of connection.
@[email protected] Hey :)
I'd personally at least give them a chance. Defederating is a pretty easy process and can be performed at any point in time. At least some Threads users may as well get to know about Lemmy and switch to it.
Upd: yes I do understand many people don't trust Meta and neither do I. But I also understand lots and lots of users here are using anonymous accounts, and federation information is already public to begin with. Combining the fact that Fediverse may gain more than it may lose, including more users, original content, recognition and etc, I generally think it's worth the risk. I am generally content with any decision, just sharing my two pennies of thought.
I highly recommend using Boost for Lemmy for mobile use. One simple reason at the moment (there are many): it has a tagging feature that allows you to display text next to a user's handle. ITT there are 4-5 users I've tagged as centrist or right wing trolls and they are all the fuck over the thread, arguing in favor of Facebook being a part of the fediverse. This does not surprise me in the least, but at least the tagging helps me immediately identify the shitbirds making bad faith arguments so I can easily ignore their garbage opinions.
For default, they are unfederated in threads.
Also, are you sure you want the mass don't know what the federated web is? We are a low number of users. If we want to me the new standard of internet, we need the people to know what de Fediverse is. And threads can be that first door, and then they can start to spread to other more suitable stances.
I just want to extend the conversation.
Do you mean instances have just all unfederated or that it's built into Lemmy itself?
I haven't heard anything on threads in a while so I'm not sure how well it took off but I agree that having something like threads could bring in more users.
Honestly I like the vibe of Lemmy and the fediverse now but I definitely do miss how there was a community for everything.
A friend of mine made a threads account, and for his account being federated, the need to search in the settings a box of "Want your account to access the fediverse?" and the default is off
Wack. At least the option is there tho I guess
I guess those nonstop arguments about Palestine and Israel will creep over if we don't defederate Threads. That is literally all I ever see in there nowadays.
What's next? Discord federates with Matrix? Give me a break.
they are
This is the way.
Let the user decide. If lemmy/mastodon user wants to block threads, let them. Defederating entirely is idiotic gatekeeping.
Better yet, I'll request the admin specifically to federate with Threads, so that I can move across the stuff that I care about to mbin from the Threads app.
Short-sighted advice from people who don't understand the purpose of ActivityPub.
Yes allowing corps into the Fediverse is very short-sighted.
While I'm cool with blocking threads.net, "we should block all corps from the Fediverse" doesn't make sense and that's a bad cause to focus on
It's fine if an instance wants to make that their policy, the fediverse gives an instance the freedom to do so, but it would provide little gain for a lot of annoyance
Other bad reasons:
We certainly should keep corps at a 1km pole from here.
They come and ruin everything they tough in the name of profit. Can they force their way? Partially, maybe, in some ways. But if we welcome them with open doors, it will get way worse. The last thing we should do is give up and say "they'll get their dirty hands into this anyway".
Let's keep this place tidy of bullshit, pretty please.
We can take precautions against their nonsense by enforcing the standards, and we can educate people about why it's a problem. That becomes difficult if we just close off entirely. We can't have an impact on things we close off to and ignore
I don't think we should give up or welcome them with open doors, I just think there's more nuance to it than "defederate from any fediverse thing tied to a for profit entity"
Facebook's case is special because of their nasty history with control and abuse, so if people want to be extra aggressive with them then I'm good with it
Well, first off - protect yourself, and then manage the rest. I welcome the noble goal of enforcement and policies and education, but it will always be like cathing a slinky.
We should be very vigilant with their presence here, and in this case, we should certainly close off.
Do you understand what corporations do?
I've got some understanding yes
I think most people here have a similar sentiment around corporations and big tech companies, which is why we're on this platform and why we donate to keep them run by nonprofits
It wasn't a roll-call.
why is snark
I'm snarky because I'm annoyed at seeing the constant FUD being lauded around here. Sorry if that snark comes off as hostile.
Yes, Meta is a shit corp who doesn't deserve any free pass. However, ActivityPub wasn't built with exclusion in mind. Nor does the protocol allow Meta access to anything that you aren't already giving up freely to thousands upon thousands of other servers (many of whom cannot or will not respect your rights to data privacy) whenever you use any Fediverse platform.
People who are scared of Meta joining the Fediverse simply do not understand how the Fediverse works, or misunderstand the design philosophy of ActivityPub.
Yes it was, that's what defederation is for. The potential for exclusion is literally built into the design philosophy of federated networks. Every instance has the freedom to not host Meta's crap. I don't know why people don't understand this.
You've also made the point that the information is still accessible, so it's not like we're taking down their instance. We're just turning it into a pariah to devalue it, and if enough instances do this, I guess that means the action is popular. If it wasn't, it wouldn't succeed. There's very little to debate here, it just sounds like you don't like people using their power to do something you disagree with. Sorry, that's up to those people. It's not for you to dictate what other people do with federation.
have different problem
platform owned by corporation tends to have more pro corporate users
what happens to existing culture on fediverse
is general trend that online communities get worse when above threshold
Most people on Threads aren’t pro-corporate, they don’t actually give a shit about that. They’re just too confused by the decentralized model to be on Mastodon, couldn’t get an invite to Bluesky, and wanted somewhere to be other than Twitter.
Being connected to it all via Threads could eventually help them get enough understanding to migrate to a different instance.
threads can still have more pro business people than fediverse
does analogy about non-technical topic work better
Likely nothing. If Threads users are problematic and Meta refuses to moderate them appropriately, then instances can defederate later.
Doing it preemptively or forming a pact is just absurd, though. It's treating the users of Threads as a threat, instead of Meta (who can and will still be able to harvest anything they want from the Fediverse, because that's how ActivityPub works), and that's not fair to them who didn't ask to be thrown into our community in the first place.
problem often cause damage before is addressed
pre block be safer
threads users signed up for threads
Clearly you haven't dealt with a Mastodon instance having a major defederation event.
For most users, regardless of the validity of the defed, the user experience is terrible. Their social graph just suddenly, stops working, the people they follow can no longer see their posts, all because of the actions of a few bad actors or administration failures.
This paired with the fact that maybe only Firefish or Misskey lets you (mostly) seamlessly migrate to a new instance with your data intact, and the lack of a standard way to see what followers you will actually keep when you migrate, means that the defederation experience is sucks, and migrating to a different instance to escape that is a pain in the ass.
Meta has already shown it has piss poor moderation in the best of times, and actively boosts incendiary content in the worst of times, all while collecting, profiling, and exploiting your data. It's literally inevitable that they're going to break the rules of all but the free-est of free speech Instances, so for the privacy, safety, and headaches of everyone in the fediverse, we might as well save ourselves the trouble.**
So what? People can run kbin or Lemmy as a standalone forum not connected to anything, if they want. People are free to use the software however they see fit. Wouldn't exactly be the first time people choose to use software in some other way then the authors intended.
You are free to make your own Mastodon/Lemmy instance and federate with them. Being able to block instances is user choice which absolutely IS the point of ActivityPub. There is no one entity that says you must federate or must defederate.
Yeah, close that protocol! Build the walls around our garden higher! No need to wait for them to actually do something worth defederating over, we just don't like them!
This is silly. A major social media network is trying to join the Fediverse and everyone's keen on stopping it. If Meta does something dirty or damaging, sure, defederate them then. But I was kind of hoping that open protocols would flourish, not just end up as another bunch of balkanized forums and Reddit-likes.
If you haven't noticed them doing dirty or damaging things for the last twenty years, feel free to engage with them.
There's more than enough evidence to show their intentions are far from pure.
How are we supposed to do that when people like you are encouraging admins to defederate which removes any semblance of freedom of choice that you are fucking trying to imply we act upon?
They're a multinational corporation, they don't need us to host their shit for you to be able to read a goddamn article and learn something.
If you don't yet understand that they're evil that's on you.
But why do YOU get to choose for everyone else?
Choose what? If you want to find an instance unscrupulous enough to federate with that company then go for it. Who is stopping you?
People like OP here, begging admin to block it?
Like are you for real? He’s literally asking them to take my choice away.
It is always the admins' choice, that has never been any different. You are free to choose which instance you are part of.
This petition changes nothing about that.
What if some of us don't care if they're evil?
The fuck is wrong with you?
Then feel free to go to threads or somewhere that does federate with them. You don't have to stay on a particular instance if they don't federate with something you want to engage with.
That's your freedom of choice.
There is no plan for kbin to defederate with Threads, which is why I'm here you dolt. Maybe you should leave.
Makes sense, Kbin is one of the most lax instances when it comes to moderation and defederation, and that's why they're considered so bad when it comes to spam and illegal content.
Then get fucked?
Meta are largely responsible for the current state of affairs right now. Nearly every current war, genocide, fake news, and more can be tied back to Meta.
Are you seriously simplifying all current conflicts caused down to simply social media? So if we completely remove all social media, humanity instantly becomes the utopian society from science fiction. STFU with this stupidity you ignorant child.
Simply? No.
Dangerously and deliberately engageful? Yes.
Look at the impact of FB in the Rohingya genocide for fucks sake.
Fucking right wing wanker.
Then you're evil. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Go ahead, be evil. It is certainly your prerogative.
Edit: just look at how many votes "But what if some of us don't care if they're evil?" got. Like, what a wild-ass bullshit thing to say. This thread is definitely being astroturfed.
I've noticed a lot of turfing on all of these threadsfed posts. It's becoming more and more. People just need to get a threads account if it's so important to them.
Well they're clearly aware of us, we can't pretend we're just a bunch of silly little beans doing our own thing anymore. Of course they're going to do this. There is literally not a single reason for them not to.
We should have rules against turfing like this in the community, and remove or ban people suspected of it. I get the benefits of having a neutral place but at the same time we don't allow advertising here so why should suspected astroturfing be any different.
It's sarcasm. I upvoted them because I would have said something similar to highlight the absurdity of any argument against defederating with Threads.
Read their replies. They are apparently being sincere. You have fallen victim to Poe's law.
Lol
Thanks, it is my prerogative.
This is the point of the freedom of federated communities: we can read whatever the fuck we want from wherever the fuck we want without having authoritarian censor-heavy limp-wrist adult-baby moderators and corporate fascists determining what we are allowed to read or affiliate with.
The freedom to read both sides and control what I want to interact with on my own will, and make my own decisions is why I'm fucking here. I don't want people like you making decisions for me, go fuck yourself.
Thanks for noticing I'm evil. I'll go make a nice blood sacrifice to my effigy of Satan by eating another baby.
Right, so nobody's stopping you from joining threads, or making your own instance. You can call it evil.villain. Why don't you?
So when they steamroll this place so hard you only get their side of the story, what then?
Well fucking said.
._.
I’m sure there will be instances that remain federated with them, and you can join those… or just join Threadstagram.
This is what I'm thinking. I don't understand why people fled from the corporate internet only to be excited to go back to them.
Defederating with Threads is a great way to make people “go back to them”, so I’m not sure what your point is.
The corporate internet is adopting an open protocol. I find that to be exciting. It's not us "going back" to the corporate internet, it's the corporate internet coming to us.
All of the corporate internet adopted open protocols in the first place. Expand your limited view and increase your awareness of the history of the networks as they evolved before Google, Microsoft, and Apple were beginning and end of tech. We got to now with open protocols. Now everything is being walled up by DRM since theyve managed to preintegrate it in all of the hardware across the board before the open protocols even come into play.
When you fuck over people with their freedoms, you don't deserve the freedom to be extended to you.
It's the same as paradox of tolerance. You shouldn't be tolerant to intolerance, and you shouldn't give freedom to those who want to strip it away from you.
That's like freedom 101.
decentralization purpose is choice to move to other instance
Or build my own, which is great to have as a contingency.
So... admins aren't free to choose? Why are you trying to take away admins freedom of choice? Sounds kind of authoritarian to me.
If you're self-hosting a personal instance, do whatever you want.
But if you're hosting a community for other people, you should consider what they want. That's the responsibility of a community leader.
That's the beauty of the fediverse, if the instance you're on isn't doing what you want, you can move to another one. Or create your own.
I'd say that's a pretty clear indicator of the popularity of decisions. Saying "No, you can't do that, cause I don't want that" is putting your desires above the desires of others.
This is why I love federated communities; the freedom of choice is great to have.
Sign up on Threads if you want Threads content. Fucking duh.
You can spin up your own server... That's what the fediverse is.
The freedom to do whatever you want as an admin, and the freedom of choosing another server where you'll still be part of the network
Meta/Facebook threatens this, because their user base dwarfs the rest of the fediverse. They're also running their own closed source server code... They can gatekeep their own federation
I would love it if companies joined the fediverse, but like, by making instances. Maybe even use it for their internal Intranet. Maybe they could add federation compatible APIs to their existing software
I don't want a massive social network company to use their position to make a new social network...
Federation is like Bitcoin or Tor - it's decentralized, until one org becomes too large... At that point, they can control the network in countless ways
Ever play Plague Inc? The secret to winning is to not become deadly until you've already become engrained and established throughout society. Then you add the deadly features once you're too deep in.
Don't let the cancer establish itself as something innocent. The owner of the platform WILL take any opportunity to seize control of the media so it can seize control of the message.
I just love this comparison 🥰
Pandemic Legacy is a great game.
"yes, they kill, torture, brutalize, pillage, and kick puppies, but if we don't allow them an equal voice, can we truly say we are any better?"
Yes. Yes we can.
I'm sure Meta won't be awful this time! Sure they've been awful quite literally every single chance they've gotten, but they won't be this time!
Damn. Better block it now because we literally can never go back to reassess.
Fuck I wish we had more time to decide!
I'm not saying they won't. I'm saying there's no reason to defederate preemptively.
I honestly don't understand how some of you have this point of view. This isn't a they've been evil once or twice thing. This is a they've been evil at every single opportunity and actively seek out more opportunities to be evil for well over a decade and you're a fucking moron for trusting them thing.
That's the only way to do it with minimal damage.
Defederating after this happens will cause a giant strain on the Fediverse and will simply accelerate the problems for which we don't want Meta here in the first place.
For some reason I can't dowvote this, so: this is a fucking stupid take
Federation means you can defederate for any reason. It's not a set of principles, it is an ontological arrangement whereby power is distributed. Plenty of users will look for defederated instances to join because keeping facebook out of our shit is what we want. You are free to find instances that are federated. Nobody will stop you.
And as for things they've done, personally I find that knowingly stoking genocide in Myanmar is enough for me to not give them any more chances.
How many times does Meta have to show you who they are before you start paying attention?
I'd be closer to agreeing with you if XMPP didn't completely invalidate your point. They did it there and they'll do it here.
XMPP works great, you just have to use it. It doesn't invalidate anything.
Theres a reason nobody uses it anymore. Google extended the crap out of it, effectively took over the protocol and then retired it. It bears the same echoes of what's happening here.
This didn't happen. In fact Google was the one who fell behind development when the protocol moved on and deprecated unencrypted connections for example. People just don't make it a priority to use XMPP instead of the walled gardens they are using now.
If you like meta so much, why are you here?
I don't like Meta. Why do you assume everyone has to be on one "team" or the other? I'm in favor of open protocols and open protocols can be used by anyone. Even if you don't like them.
Every open protocol that survives past the first couple of days of actual use, no exceptions, has some mechanism whereby bad actors can be removed.
Don't use "open protocol" as your excuse for sucking Zuck the Fuck off.
As I just said, I don't like Meta. And keep your homophobic slurs out of civil discussion.
But they are not yet a bad actor on the Fediverse because they haven't actually joined the Fediverse yet. If you're so convinced that they're going to do something awful, why the big deal about defederating preemptively?
You don't like Meta. You're just arguing vociferously for inviting Meta, a company with nearly two decades of documented abuse of everything they touch, into another space for them to fuck over.
Pull the other one, Sparky. It plays Jingle Bells.
There's no need to invite Meta, the invitation has already been given by the fact that ActivityPub is an open protocol. I'm just very annoyed by the cavalcade of people who were so quick to tout that benefit over Reddit's walled garden now turning on their heel and reacting "but not like that!" When that openness is made use of.
Embrace, extend, extinguish.
You are either innocently unaware of how it works or just dissassociating from reality. Meta has to compete with Fediverse if it can't directly harvest user activity for marketing and advertising systems. They quite obviously will (have to?) do everything they can to influence technical decisions that allow them to steer the protocols in a way that is profitable rather than for the good of the end users and communities.
They ultimately will seek to build walls around their development and services on their terms and leave others not part of their profitable ecology of development outside of those walls. They are a publicly traded corporation, this is just a normal evolution in for-profit corps, even if current employees do act as positive curators of community engagement.
The protocol only needed an open license that forbade profiting off user data.
That's a pretty big restriction for an "open" protocol.
Defederation is part of the protocol.
At least make your rhetoric somewhat resemble reality? Please?
They're confused and likely think that federation means no rules and unconditional access to any server from your account, when it couldn't be further from the truth. I've said it elsewhere but people craving that don't want the fediverse, they want Nostr.
This place is the way it is, why it's enjoyable to be on, because we can and do defederate servers run by bots, trolls, or any other malicious actors, otherwise they run wild.
Yes, and I've got nothing against defederation. Once there's actually a reason to defederate.
Nearly 20 years of Facebook abuse is apparently not a reason.
Holy fucking shit is the attention span of humanity getting short.
The microbloggers are a bit different than us, in that they actually try to create a "social circle." Threaded discussions with random assholes like we enjoy tend to be more focused on giving us someone to reply to.
This IS Facebook. It's guaranteed. They're evil. Block them now.
I can see that threads.net may harm the Fediverse. But, there might be some people that don't like the threads client and want to use the fediverse to interact with them. This will divide us. Also, trying to have a standard were threads.net is blocked is very hard to spread. Maybe has to be default on the server side, or even better, a subscription.
I haven't defederated anyone yet, I don't intend to defederated from Instagrams new failed Twitter clone.
No I don't think I will
I want a server where users can make these decisions for themselves.
Fuck this mob-mentality spurred upon by losers.
Why not just let them choose instead of trying to get users to brigade them? Personally I want my insurance federated with Threads.
I'm all for defederating, but only until we know what their intentions are. I'm more worried about Mastodon than Lemmy, but still, that's not the point. The only power any of us have is to file an official complaint with the FTC and make a distinct point, not just "I hate meta/Facebook and want them to go away" it has to be a logical complaint such as "their terms of service are overstepping their boundaries and taking ownership of data on competing platforms that they do not own to lock out competitors." It's really the only thing anyone in the US can do.
I would hate for the fediverse to die by zuck the cuck's hand, but the sad truth is open source is the enemy of corporate platforms, and it's encouraging enough that ActivityPub is enough of a threat to Meta that they're willing to go to these measures to make sure their bottom line isn't harmed. The real fucked up thing is their intention to farm other platforms users with their consent and that's the real problem.
And another attempt at blanket hating on a platform for no reason. Be more original, people.
Edit: if YOU don't like it, sure block it. But don't force your backwards decision on everyone else.
I think we should let meta federated to the fediverse until they try to influence it or integrate ads in posts or something else that can hurt the fediverse
Nah. More content and a lower percentage of extremists is a good thing.
Sadly i dsagree with you, nobary cares about this peace of junk (seriously, microblog without hashtags?). Also i think is fedverse is a great place in general and i trust in all instances moderators, and any bot or think like this have interesting in us. I don;t worry about, for me is one more day with meta bulshit, thatś it
Why do you hate user choice so much?
Dumb argument is dumb. We need to defederate the internet! LAN not WAN!
If I don't like it I won't look at it, simple as.
The preemptive strike is interesting. The cost will be a lack of knowledge. We know our enemy but we don't know them on this terrain yet.
I don't like Meta, but that's far from the worst corporate rights record. I say wait and see how it turns out first.
Lol no. That said, I'm on Threads too so whatevs.
People are overreacting.
No we're not. Read up on what happened to xmpp. Google joined it, made the service much slower for people not on their servers, everybody joined their servers, they shut their service down for their own proprietary stuff.
Edit: https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html
Embrace
Extend
Extinguish
I call bullshit. People not using Google servers were unaffected. The problem is people using walled gardens instead of making XMPP compatibility a requirement.
https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html
That doesn't make sense. If Google was making xmpp worse then the servers could just defederate. At this moment threads has not done anything to warrant defederation.
Just because you have no experience, you think it's overreacting.
Compared to you who has so much experience with threads joining the fediverse.
I really don't think that's the case.
This is a nice little place, meta barging in Will fuck it all up
They aren't barging in. You need to follow the threads user. Only on mastodon are they "barging in".
If Kbin defederates from Threads, I'll just leave Kbin, and stay with Threads. Defederating over vibes is not how the fediverse is supposed to operate. And for everyone advocating for this dumb idea, I'm just using this thread as a honey pot.
I’m pretty clear that meta has more problems than “vibes”.
No, the entire point is that you're free to go to whatever instance you want and/or host your own with your own rules. You're more than welcome to go to one that doesn't defederate, just as every instance owner/admins are free to defederate. It's not how "the fediverse is supposed to operate" because a standard for how the fediverse is supposed to operate doesn't exist.
fediverse isn't supposed to have most users concentrated in one instance also
Big tech is a cancer on the internet. It makes sense to avoid it.
Once they can interact with your account, they can pull your data into their server and analyzing it to deliver ads campaign.
They can already do this by hosting a small instance and going unnoticed.
They can get the data, but they need the federation so people see their content/advertisement.
And whenever an account from Threads upvote/ downvote or reply to your comments/posts or vice versa, Meta will analyze that and they can sell ads based on your political leanings, gender, geo-location, hobbies, marital status etc.
That's the options from what I saw from fb ads dashboard years ago. If you're from US, that options are broader and more detailed.
How would they get the data? Federation doesn’t mean that they will get full access to your account.
Bye felicia.
Bye then!
Here have a glass of boot juice for the voyage.
Please let the door hit you in the ass on the way out