227
Meta's decentralized social plans confirmed. Is Embrace-Extend-Extinguish of the Fediverse next? (reb00ted.org)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/technology@beehaw.org
238 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 24 points 3 years ago (9 children)

At least with this structure we can still defederate from them and go on about our merry way.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (8 children)

    Until they take over and force a change that renders things back centralized into their hands.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 3 years ago (7 children)

    That makes zero sense, that's not how the fediverse works. Explain how they would take over completely independent and unconnected instances that are defederated from them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 3 years ago (4 children)

    Implement new features that only work when you integrate with Meta, then cut them out of the picture if they don't do what Meta says. The majority of users will stick with the instances that have the stickers and emojis that their friends have. Similar to what Google is doing with it's browser and the Internet.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    So we have the exact structure we have now. A centralized platform, or instance, for the people that don't care and our current federated instances for the people that do care.

    This is all a big nothing burger. Continue to not use meta instances and platform like we're literally doing right now.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago

    Agreed. Truth be told, should the fediverse become mainstream, the masses will want the shiny bells and whistles and stick to the instances that support them. Those of us that could care less aren't going to be swayed by them, and steer clear. Unless FB somehow manages to take over the codebase and force everyone into their shit, I think we'll be fine.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (1 child)

    See also: Google with Gmail.

    Good luck running your own mail server these days, and getting your messages actually delivered to Gmail and Outlook/O365 mailboxes. It's possible, but a hassle, and the rug can get pulled at any moment.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago

    Just configure your SPF record properly and you should be fine having emails delivered to gmail. I work in tech support for a small software company and every single time a customer is having issues with our email server not delivering to GMail, it's due to their SPF record being borked (which is on the customer's IT department, not us)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 1 point 3 years ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 child)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago

    Meta already has the masses right now and is currently defederated from us as we speak, them making an instance and not federating would change literally nothing for us from our current structure.

    Besides, it would be a benefit if they defederated themselves voluntarily. They've already shown their moderation to be shit and no telling what they'll try to do with our data, I wouldn't want to be on any instance that federates with the Meta instance(s).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent