Threads’ roadmap for integrations with the fediverse, aka the network of decentralized apps that includes Twitter/X rival Mastodon and others, has been revealed. A new blog post by Tom Coates, the co-founder of an older decentralized app called Planetary, details the events of a December meeting at Meta’s offices where the Threads team had reached out to members of the fediverse community to get feedback about the Instagram-led project to take on X with a decentralized app that will eventually interoperate with others in the fediverse by way of the ActivityPub protocol.
I mean I get why people running open source, small software projects are going to find it hard not to be convinced just by the fact that they are probably getting their ego stroked super hard by meeting with extremely powerful and rich people… but this is such a stupid idea.
We don’t need meta, they don’t DO anything. What does meta do for the fediverse? Sure you can argue it brings in a ton of users but meta is a for-profit entity and it is never going to truly bring those users into the fediverse. Meta has an absurd amount of money, if they haven’t committed to creating a fediverse like idea in the past what makes everyone think now is different?
Why is a massive corporation with the money to fund 1000 fediverse software projects coming to a bunch of volunteers for help? Seriously, think about it, it really doesn’t make sense unless meta isn’t coming here for help but rather to mine and extract the value here for itself. We have ALREADY built most of the software tools that a too-big-to-function tech company with a lot of programmers could help with anyways, it is far too late in the game for meta to do anything meaningful there besides speed things up a little.
If we accept meta into the fediverse it might seem like we are winning by technically adding a ton of users but for heaven’s sake people need to realize winning doesn’t mean giving all your shit to the other side. The fediverse will become barely any better than the current corporate social network world, so what is the point?
I mean, they are NEVER going to invest in a significant amount of human moderators, that would basically admit the business model of a for-profit social network is fundamentally busted. They will “try” to do it with “””Ai””” and also through underpaid employees in moderation farms in third world countries who are constantly getting traumatized from having to see all the most offensive shit… but it is never going to work.
The question is, why did you come here in the first place? For me, letting meta in violates most of those reasons.
Wait, you mean you don’t like how algorithms and ads have evolved to almost be content at this point. You don’t want a bunch of for-profit ads suggesting you buy things you don’t need? Lol, you’re not in it for the cash grab? :OOOOO WHAT!?!?!?!?!
What does meta do for the fediverse?
By that logic though, what does lemmy.ml do for the fediverse? Or mas.to? Or any specific instance? Nothing, they’re one cog in a pool of federated instances.
And make no mistake, either the fediverse stays so tiny companies ignore it other than what Meta is doing now (to pre-empty EU legislation so they can point at supporting open interoperable formats), or we have to accept commercial enterprises will flood the fedi-space anyways if it takes off.
And make no mistake, either the fediverse stays so tiny companies ignore it other than what Meta is doing now (to pre-empty EU legislation so they can point at supporting open interoperable formats), or we have to accept commercial enterprises will flood the fedi-space anyways if it takes off.
I agree, the entrance of large corporations into the fediverse is nearly inevitable and I am ok with that. What matters is how and when they do it and how that changes the politics, identity and community of the fediverse. WE have the cards because as you say corporate social networks that basically have monopolies are going to eventually be forced by regulation (unless we are on even shittier timeline than I thought) to join the fediverse or do something similar.
Think about the difference though between welcoming in meta to the fediverse like they are some cool popular kid that decided to join our lame party and now everyone wants to come to the party vs rejecting meta because we know their offer isn’t genuine and making them come back later to the fediverse in a much more precarious situation where they HAVE to work something out with us or they face geometrically growing legal and populist hostility that threatens the existence of their company?
Which situation is more likely to result in a relationship more advantageous to normal people and communities on the fediverse? Which one puts more power in the hands of small communities and regular people on the fediverse? Which one is less likely to result in meta hijacking the public’s perception of the fediverse and subverting the reasons that the original denizens of the fediverse came here for?
I’m not okay with it.
I’m all for cutting federation with any instance that allows them in to their space.
I think that is a good and healthy stance. No matter if it is right or not, I consider the survival of the idea of the fediverse as a separate space than corporate social networks requires there to be communities on the fediverse that reject corporate entities on principle.
To use books as a metaphor, let’s say bookstores pioneered the idea of spaces that people can get books at. This is basically what happened with social networks (I know there are probably wrinkles to this but whatever).
The fediverse may look like a bookstore superficially. We could think of it is a building with people dedicated to managing a large selection of books. People go in and out to get books. Trucks periodically come with large orders of books and those books are then distributed over time to people that visit the building.
The fediverse isn’t a bookstore though, it is a library and it’s important that we don’t let that fact be forgotten.
Nothing about the technology of the fediverse is really that special (though it is very impressive I am sure), it is the human structure and the idea of the fediverse as an entity that makes it special. In the same way that the difference between a bookstore and a library can’t really be found in different patterns of delivery trucks, book rentals or the arrangement of bookshelves in the building, neither can the difference between the fediverse and existing corporate social networks truly be found in the technical specifications. At the end of the day, the real difference is in what humans see as the goals of a library vs a bookstore, i.e. the real difference is how the people involved in creating and maintaining the fediverse conceptualize the fediverse itself.
Which isn’t to say I am against certain parts of the fediverse having companies involved, but it is very important that we win the ideological battle of defining social networks as communities to be maintained (which may or may not be a paying job for those involved) for the betterment of society, as a public service, not as an entity conceived to pursue profit.
I think it is fantastic that communities are immediately rejecting meta on principle. Nobody, no matter their position on this, should be genuinely interested in meta’s first real attempt at joining the fediverse. It is just a silly way to go about interacting with an entity that has far more to lose than you do and has demonstrated time and time again that it cannot be trusted to tell the truth or act in good faith.
We don’t have to grow at a viral rate, sure the fediverse being much larger is probably a good thing for the world and thus pushing for it can be seen as a moral imperative, but let’s not kid ourselves, this is social media and memes, this isn’t some life giving essential service. It is ok if we don’t grow as absolutely fast as possible. The people that the fediverse is truly most life changing for anyways are the people most deeply hurt and traumatized by awful experiences on corporate social media where the corporation at best is neutral about bigotry, death threats, harassment etc…… *sigh *
To bring it back to libraries, look at how the best libraries in communities have grown to be far more than just places people can borrow books from. They are fluid community spaces where interesting ideas can take hold and flourish. Bookstores never really grow past the idea of selling books, except maybe to have a cafe attached. The best modern day libraries on the other hand are spaceships of community (that happen to be stuffed with books) in a wasteland of private and commercial real estate, they are engines of culture.
Let’s not let the fediverse get stuck on just being a better bookstore…
kick em back to the curb
lemmy.ml is the flagship instance. that’s like asking what mastodon.social does for the fediverse.
Yeah what do they? Just their size? So if Threads brings in huge amounts of federation users that’d automatically make them relevant and useful to have around? Size matters, especially when it comes to your federated instance?
it’s not their size. they are literally the developers.
Meta could take over the fediverse pretty easily once they’ve been here for a while.
Nothing, they’re one cog in a pool of federated instances.
Yes, Threads will be technically just an instance of a federated network with thousands of instances. But Threads is so fucking big in comparison that most posts will come from there. And at that point, they can impose their algorithms and recommendations on us.
Brace yourselves, “fascists won’t be able to follow me” posts incoming.
And what if I don’t want to be followed from Meta?
Don’t post on the internet. If you think Meta doesn’t also crawl the web the old school way like Google also does to train AI and such, you’re seriously out of touch with reality.
Giving them your own data legally and that they illegally fetch your data is not same.
Crawling the web isn’t illegal. Google wouldn’t exist if it was.
So why the New York Times sued OpenAI? There are multiple cases regarding this. Why do online and public platforms feel entitled to sue AI companies (according to you)?
If OpenAI and NYT were 2 news sites in the fediverse and had the ability to share their news with each other; I’m sure NYT couldn’t file such a lawsuit.
Did they win? Simply suing isn’t the same as being right.
Is it wrong to get Author’s Guild lawsuit vibes with the NYT vs. OpenAI stuff? Seems similar.
That’s the difference I’m trying to explain. If you give them, you have no right. If they do it themselves, then you can at least sue.
It’s like I stop locking my door because there’s a chance burglars could break into my house and steal things at any time.
Well, the good news is that according to this list, your instance already blocks Threads.
Is there any way for me to know if a Kbin instance also blocked Threads?
You could try to follow a user from threads, such as @mosseri. I guess that won’t be possible from instances where threads is defederated.
am block threads and still see
Well, if you’re right, Kbin looks to not have defederated Threads
Maybe you have blocked Threads yourself? I’m not sure if Kbin even supports that (it’s possible on Mastodon and Pixelfed), but I can see Mosseri’s account just fine from my end!
Oh, I tried to say that I can see and even follow this Threads account, so probably Kbin is still federated! Sorry if it wasn’t clear
Oops, you’re perfectly clear - I’m just tired and misread. Yes, Kbin is still federated with Threads indeed. :)
just post as unlisted like you could from the start?
Please explain. Unlisted as in without a username?
no there are levels of privacy when you make a post on mastodon. public, unlisted, followers only, and only people mentioned.
unlisted opts out of discovery like the public timelines
deleted by creator
December meeting at Meta’s offices where the Threads team had reached out to members of the fediverse community to get feedback about the Instagram-led project
Is this the one people thought Ruud was a part of?
All I know is that Stux’s instances was on the fence regarding Threads until a little meeting with Ruud somewhere in the Netherlands a few weeks ago. 😉
Who is Stux?
Edit: they run mstdn.social
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Threads’ roadmap for integrations with the fediverse, aka the network of decentralized apps that includes Twitter/X rival Mastodon and others, has been revealed.
A new blog post by Tom Coates, the co-founder of an older decentralized app called Planetary, details the events of a December meeting at Meta’s offices where the Threads team had reached out to members of the fediverse community to get feedback about the Instagram-led project to take on X with a decentralized app that will eventually interoperate with others in the fediverse by way of the ActivityPub protocol.
Meta did, in fact, start testing ActivityPub integration in December, allowing Threads posts to appear on Mastodon.
In addition, this rule would potentially come into play when a user banned from Meta’s platform moved their content to another Mastodon server.
Coates suggested various reasons why Meta may be pursuing this — perhaps to thwart coming regulation or to take over Twitter/X’s place in the zeitgeist as new owner Elon Musk turns it into an everyday app, potentially diluting its value as a fast-breaking news network and home to conversations.
Explained Flipboard CEO Mike McCue in a conversation with TechCrunch last month, what excited him about Mastodon and ActivityPub was that it wasn’t just about where social media was heading, it was where the web itself was going.
The original article contains 709 words, the summary contains 219 words. Saved 69%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
when a user banned from Meta’s platform moved their content to another Mastodon server.
Isn’t this a huge problem for the fediverse where a user would them need to be banned twice? It feels like Meta is pushing their problems out to others to deal with.
I’m not sure if this is the intended mechanism but it does seem like a problem for moderators. I hope this is being addressed or fediverse mods will be swamped with bad actors considering Meta’s potentially huge user base.
So I can be on one near-empty platform that can get followed by another near-empty platform?
Yeah basically. Although I don’t know, is Threads that small? Bluesky is the most successful alternative to Twitter from what I see around companies stating where they are posting?
It’s hard to say how many active users are on Threads, but of 160 million registered users there’s probably somewhere between 20 and 50 million (somewhat) active ones. That’s more people than are signed up to Bluesky, as far as I can gather.
A lot of Twitter addicts are going to Bluesky, whereas Threads feeds off the huge user base of Instagram. Bluesky just looks more relevant seen from the Fediverse because it attracts a bunch of dorks.
Twitter is where the people are, and the fascists make up less than half. It’s like living in America: stick to your neighborhood and you’ll be fine, go through the trending hashtags and expect a world of hurt.
Removed by mod
hopefully the other way around too; threads has a lot of the mainstream people i used to follow when i had twitter and i’d love to follow them again.
