I just read this point in a comment and wanted to bring it to the spotlight.

Meta has practically unlimited resources. They will make access to the fediverse fast with their top tier servers.

As per my understanding this will make small instances less desirable to the common user. And the effects will be:

  1. Meta can and will unethically defedrate from instances which are a theat to them. Which the majority of the population won’t care about, again making the small instances obsolete.
  2. When majority of the content is on the Meta servers they can and will provide fast access to it and unethically slow down access to the content from outside instances. This will be noticeable but cannot be proved, and in the end the common users just won’t care. They will use Threads because its faster.

This is just what i could think of, there are many more ways to be evil. Meta has the best engineers in the world who will figure out more discrete and impactful ways to harm the small instances.

Privacy: I know they can scrape data from the fediverse right now. That’s not a problem. The problem comes when they launch their own Android / iOS app and collect data about my search and what kind of Camel milk I like.

My thoughts: I think building our own userbase is better than federating with an evil corp. with unlimited resources and talent which they will use to destroy the federation just to get a few users.

I hope this post reaches the instance admins. The Cons outweigh the Pros in this case.

We couldn’t get the people to use Signal. This is our chance to make a change.

  • ScaNtuRd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 years ago

    I’m hoping that ALL admins across the Fediverse will defederate from Meta. At least we get to have our own separate platform then.

    • amiuhle@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      They shouldn’t just defederate from Meta, they should defederate from any other instances that federate with Meta. Like a firewall against late stage capitalism

      • TaleOfSam@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Meta willingly under-moderated across large swaths of east Asia and Africa, leading to unchecked rumors and tangible acts of genocide. Zuckerberg has compared himself to Augustus Caesar.

        I think it’s acceptable to cut off a wildfire before it spreads.

        • masterspace@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          Lemmy is run by a bunch of tankies and the entire fediverse is under-moderated.

          Cutting off a ton of users and content from the fediverse is stupid and everyone in here just keeps coming up with vague generalities because they’re scared of Meta rather than have actually thought through what will happen and be able to articulate any actual harms.

          • Marxine@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            “Boo hoo tankies bad, but big corpo run by billionaires who spread misinformation and intentionally act to topple legitimate governments in favor of their fascist agenda are akshually good”

            Arguing with people like you (corporate shill) is a waste of time, so I’d rather have fun instead.

  • Move to lemm.ee@lemmy.worldBanned
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    I think the issue being missed here is that Meta will ultimately aim to suck all users into themselves, and then once they feel they’ve done enough of that, they will go completely closed, even potentially forking the protocol itself. If any legal attempt to stop this is made they will bog it down with hordes of lawyers for decades.

    Their goal is not to help fediverse, it is recognising fediverse to be a threat and aiming to absorb it. Literally no different to how reddit slowly absorbed all internet forums into itself, killing the distributed internet.

    Fediverse is attempting to bring back that distributed internet and they’re trying to find ways to kill it. All corporations seek monopoly, it’s how capitalism works.

  • janWilejan@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    For those who don’t know, the strategy is called Embrace, Extend, and Extinguish. The phase comes from Microsoft who used this to (try to) crush competing document editors, Java implementations, browsers, and operating systems. Other big tech companies employ similar strategies.

    Facebook coming to the Fediverse is the Embrace phase of this process and that makes Mastodon, Lemmy, Kbin, Misskey, and Akkoma the competitors.

  • dystop@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Everyone is talking about defederating because of XMPP and EEE. But the very fact that we know about EEE means that it’s much less likely to succeed.

    Zuck is seeing the metaverse crash and burn and he knows he needs to create the next hot new thing before even the boomers left on facebook get bored with it. Twitter crashing and burning is a perfect business opportunity, but he can’t just copy Twitter - it has to be “Twitter, but better”. Hence the fediverse.

    From Meta’s standpoint, they don’t need the Fediverse. Meta operates at a vastly different scale. Mastodon took 7 years to reach ~10M users - Threads did that in a day or two. My guess is that Zuck is riding on the Fediverse buzzword. I’m sure whatever integration he builds in future will be limited.

    TL;DR below:

    • notavote@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      I don’t think that FB even knows that lemmy exist, problem is they are so big they will crush us by accident.

      Even back than with XMPP, Google didn’t kill it intentionally. No one expected it will be smaller than before google used it. I remember watching empty list where all friends were. But it happened, and I never thought that Google wanted to kill XMPP.

  • eee@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    I get all the hate for meta and zuck, and I agree that they would only do so for their own commercial benefit, but I don’t think we should defederate without seeing what federating means. Everyone here is instinctively panicking and running around like headless chickens without seeing what it would actually entail.

    Threads is like mastodon. If federating with threads only means that threads users can participate in lemmy, I see that as an advantage for us.

    If we were a mastodon instance, this conversation would be very different.

  • HopperMCS@twisti.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Regardless of what anyone thinks about politics, nothing good will come by letting them in. I hope all current instances defederate, I know mine will.

  • LemmyLegume@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Love the dialogue here but you always have to follow the money trail. The best way to keep what we love is to bankroll our instances to keep them running and scalable to additional users without ads. Remember, if you aren’t paying for the product then you become the product. Meta has nothing without selling ads or monetizing user data. That’s their business model. As long as we chip in we can always maintain our independence. I’m fine with never seeing or interacting with content from Threads.

  • _cerpin_taxt_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    If I wanted to see content from my racist Trumper uncle, I would just create a Facebook account. Keep Threads far away from the rest of the Fediverse. We don’t need to compete with them. Who cares if they’re way bigger with way more content if 99% of that content is garbage?

    • RedAggroBest@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      if 99% of that content is garbage?

      Counterpoint: beans.

      Serious note: I think the point of decentralized networks like this is that each instance will have to choose to federate with Threads or any other future corporate social media. If that sounds dangerous, welcome to the freedom of choice baybee! It sucks that the truth is that as long as we want this to be a free space where people can choose what and where they see content, that means some will choose to work with the big-easy-techgiant rather than take a harder approach because 99% of people aren’t that invested.

  • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    Honestly, I still have more hope for Signal compared to Lemmy/fediverse. As much as I like it here, Signal is just so much more user-friendly and explainable. I am also slowly making people around me set it up.

  • ReveredOxygen@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    Luckily, they can’t force federated access to be slow. Once you federate with them, their content is copied to your instance. It’s not necessary for every fediverse user to contact Threads, it’ll just be served from each user’s home instance

    • notavote@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      I also think they don’t care about us, I doubt they even know we exist.

      That doesn’t change that they would destroy us unintentionally. Like Vogons.

  • count0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    I guess this will already have been said, but nonetheless:

    I like the feeling of community as it is right now in the Fediverse very much.

    Most of me hopes that it will not successfully federate with Meta, ever; or if it “must”, in a way that will be mostly irrelevant to me (communities I wouldn’t subscribe to in the first place, anyway).

    I don’t see how that, in turn, would give Meta any control over the parts of the Fediverse that I care about. If they want to join and contribute in good faith, fine. If not, also fine. Why should it change anything for Fediverse “centered” communities?

    I never cared about size or majority, but about quality of content and discourse. And I find that in those points, the current Fediverse much outshines anything else I’ve seen (Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, …) in the last decade or so.

    • Flemmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      I share your priorities, but I don’t think you understand the depth and breath of how they can ruin this for us… The only guarantee is that, at some point (maybe tomorrow, maybe in 5 years), they’ll ask “how can we extract value from this investment?”. That’s what a corporation is, it can’t help it anymore than fire can choose how hot to burn

      But even before then, we have misaligned goals. At best, their priority is to generate an endless stream of advertiser friendly content, extract information about users, and grow endlessly. At worst, they want to use us to help kill Twitter while ensuring federation of individuals does not become a viable model for social media

      • count0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        How would they ensure this latter thing?

        In my current understanding, it’s readily possible today (on Lemmy and related software), what could Meta do to keep this from continuing to work?

        • Flemmy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          By convincing people at large that social media run by individuals or groups isn’t viable.

          Personally, I’d do it by attacking the credibility of the admins. Sow doubt. “they only run servers so they can steal your data”, “look at this guy! He pretends he cares about free speech, but he’s abusing his power to censor and radicalize people!” “The only reason you’d use these private instances is if you have something to hide. That place is for criminals”

          They might even be able to get legislation passed to make it legally risky to run the servers in the US if they control the narrative

          Only early adopters, technical people, and the privacy minded care about how this actually works, and we’ve been telling our friends and family how bad Facebook is for years (for good reason). At first they didn’t care, but now I get push back

          Next, make it unreliable. If it goes down frequently, gets flooded by bots, or just starts to suck in general, most of the people here now will leave, no matter how important federated social networks are. Maybe they’ll go to servers that bend over backwards to become offshoots of threads, maybe they’ll look for Reddit clones elsewhere, personally I’d start up a private federation for friends and family if this goes south

          Regardless, this place will become an empty mall - if it’s not a healthy form of social media I’m not going to spend much time here, and I’m extremely passionate about it

          And the last option is just ads and incentives. Make it tempting and play to fomo.

          They’ll probably do all of this to some degree, especially if we explode in numbers and present actual competition.

          We’re ready to handle it, but we also need to make sure the battle lines are as far away as possible

  • XenGi@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    The content I want to have will never be on a meta server. And even if, I will not federate with them and not use them.

    For the exact same reasons I also don’t use Facebook.