this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2023
31 points (100.0% liked)
Fediverse
8 readers
2 users here now
This magazine is dedicated to discussions on the federated social networking ecosystem, which includes decentralized and open-source social media platforms. Whether you are a user, developer, or simply interested in the concept of decentralized social media, this is the place for you. Here you can share your knowledge, ask questions, and engage in discussions on topics such as the benefits and challenges of decentralized social media, new and existing federated platforms, and more. From the latest developments and trends to ethical considerations and the future of federated social media, this category covers a wide range of topics related to the Fediverse.
founded 1 year ago
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No, I don´t think that you really understand the concern. Specially if, as you say, Threads will slowly federate this and that server, poisoning the fediverse.
If Threads begins federating, the "ten foot pole" is going to touch you, like it or not.
Independently from what Meta wants, do you want to federate with them?
Seems like you didn't really understand my point. Meta is very averse to, for example, any NSFW content, or using words that aren't G-rated to talk about other people. I do not think there will be a slow creep of Meta federating with server by server, because I do not think 99% of servers are willing to abide by those restrictions. If you want me to make up numbers, I think Meta will federate with 10 servers, at most, and that's it.
The other part of the equation, from what I understand, is authorized fetch. If servers implement that, that prevents Threads from accessing their content from a middle-man server if defederated.
So no, I don't want to federate with them. But I also think that writing off kbin because Ernest hasn't already defederated is a premature, knee-jerk reaction.
I do understand your point. You are case 1: Meta federates with remote instance with no contractual relationship.
Case 1 will never happen because Meta will never allow uncontrolled content over their platform, they will always, always demand that yous sign an agreement before you write anything on their servers. Their lawyers will never allow strangers to publish just like that.
I'm taking about case 2: where Meta federates servers who agree to sign a chart with Meta. A legal framework, which also involves content moderation control, data flow control, etc. And this will cause a big risk of Meta slowly pushing their changes into the protocol. The more servers follow the bigger the danger becomes for everyone.
It's not a knee-jerk reaction, it's a safety precaution against a corporation of which we know the methods. Do you know of a bigger predator to us?
They don't want your friendship, they don't care at all about this open source fediverse thing. We are a risk to their business, nothing else. Other fell before, other will fall after. There is nothing to gain here for us and everything to lose, so block it.