this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2023
786 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37702 readers
288 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Meta has a monetary interest in divering from the activity hub standard. They will use it to stand out from all other federated instances with cool features you can only use on meta instances.
New people will join metas instances because they are "clearly better" and it will be difficult to deny. Sure there will be ads, privacy concerns etc. but most people don't care about that.
The rest of the federated network will over time lose users to meta because people want to stay connected and that's difficult to do when two instances don't share the same features.
The end result is meta oficially forking activity hub and disconnecting from the rest of the federated network.
It's the death of activity hub and what we are trying to build here.
The only way to prevent it is by preventing meta instances from taking off. The main way to do that is to not allow their instances to benefit from the rest of the federated network and to inform meta users of better alternatives. It's impossible for a disorganized opensource project to keep up with the features that 1000's of meta developers are paid to do.
Those people that would join that instance and care about that are already on Meta platforms, they can continue to stay on them if they wish it doesn't affect our communities that we're building here.
Good. The people that leave these communities for the Meta ones are probably not people that I would want to be communicating with already, this is a positive, not a negative. You're acting like we need billions of users for healthy communities, a few hundred to a few thousand (what we currently have) is more than adequate.
You mean what most instances are planning to do already? Again, the logic doesn't add up. We're planning to defederate from their instances right out of the gate, so them having a fork of activitypub makes no difference to our communities.
No it's not, stop being ridiculous.
Again, you're acting like we care about those features. If we did, we wouldn't be on this janky alpha software. I love Lemmy, but it's got a lot of growing pains.
I can't stand all this doomer talk, it's so exhausting.
This is the rebuttal i needed to hear 🥲 i want to have faith we can withstand meta's tar-like ooze seeping into the fediverse
It just doesn't make sense.
"They're going to have the vast majority of users with more features and be defederated from us!"
... You mean the EXACT structure we have now? That's where 99% of people are already, those platforms already have more features than we do, and we're not connected to them already. Them doing what is being described has literally zero impact on our communities. This is all so annoying and I'm tired of having the conversation.
/rant