Gregory's ServerIt's always a pleasure to see a popular Threads account with fediverse-sharing enabled. Despite such a vast difference in the platforms, we can achieve a human connection. But fediverse integration in Threads is still in a sorry state over a year since launch. They need to be able to follow us back. They need to see when we mention them. Those are such basic things.
 43 comments
@Gargron I agree, whole heartedly. Yes, platforms are different but we should be able to cross "pollinate" easily   @Gargron Somehow, I am a concerned Meta is up to no good. Let's hope I am wrong. I am more optimistic with BlueSky. Is so nice there!  @Gargron 'Human connection' requires the same level of interaction on both ends. This seems just being... audience.   @darnell @Gargron @mosseri @zuck @verge @threads @tomcoates Also, listen to Peter's update given a month ago at FediForum: https://spectra.video/w/w8ErDiH83UTptZsUxQzbkg If I wanted to be on Threads, I'd have a Threads account. As far as I'm concerned they can fuck all the way off. I moved to an instance that blocks Threads so I don't have to interact with them. @Sir_Osis_of_Liver Well, you could say "If I wanted to be on beige.party, I'd have a beige.party account", and yet here we are talking to each other while using completely separate platforms. That's the principle of the fediverse and I don't see why it shouldn't apply to Threads. I want to talk to people regardless of which platform they choose. If you can't see the difference between a massive, industry dominating conglomerate with a history of devastating what it considers to be competitors, and an instance run as a hobby, then I can't help you. Frankly, I can't believe anyone could be that naive. @Sir_Osis_of_Liver Do you refuse to accept text messages or phone calls from friends unless they're on the same phone network as you? Do you refuse to send e-mails to your friends unless they self-host their e-mail? It should not matter what provider you use. People should be able to connect. That's the principle of the fediverse. Telecom is a very bad example. We've got a problem right now that all of the smaller telecoms in Canada have been bought out by two major vertically-integrated conglomerates. They collude on pricing and we pay some of the highest rates for mobile, internet and cable on the planet. The plucky little companies got absolutely steamrolled. @Gargron @Sir_Osis_of_Liver mail servers must comply with ISO/IETF open standards to make SMTP protocol symmetrical, interoperable and independent from the service provider. In a similar way, phone networks must follow ISO/ITU open standards. International no-profit standardisation entities prevent bigger companies to take advantage of a technology against public interest, and I hope that an international standardisation entity for social media platforms will rise asap.  @Gargron @Sir_Osis_of_Liver Id say Telecom is a great example. In north UK, a city called Hull has had an independent telecom since forever - Kcom. Hull has NEVER had British Telecom networks or even public phone boxes (theyre white, not red). Even now, it is still independent. Yet, it is seamlessly connected to BT and beyond into global telecom. Other cities/areas could have done this in the past in UK but they chose not to. 'They need to be able to follow us back.' They really don't Enshittification appears inevitable for all platforms but let's delay it on the 'Toots for as long as possible  @Gargron Meta's only interest in the fediverse is 3E. Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. Nothing good comes from engaging with a parasitic entity that has literally facilitated genocide for its own commercial gain. Meta is an amoral leech on the fediverse that won't be satisfied until it owns everything or kills off the original protocol. Just like XMPP. Meta is an active threat to the fediverse and should never be given the benefit of the doubt.  @Gargron They still can't see when we mention them? So all the federated threads accounts I've been requesting to ask their friends to federate can't even see my request? Great. @Gargron Ok, cool. I've been replying to people's posts. So I think they can see me but so far nobody has gotten anyone I've asked to federate. I'll keep trying.   @Gargron It’s weird when you think about. It’s like they’ve drilled a peephole in the wall, but it’s obvious they need to build a full door.
[DATA EXPUNGED]
 @Gargron The cynic in me would not be surprised if they leave a half-broken state. But I also did not think they'd get as far as they have. That said I still don't see a reason for them to fully integrate! Who would use Threads with ads when Mastodon without exists?   The billionaires behind Threads aren't big on concepts like reciprocity, consensus, or mutual respect. It shows. Sequoia Capital @Gargron let's not even mention ALL the mastodon servers that have outright blocked threads federation too. Can't follow any of my IRL friends on threads from here.   @Gargron I presume it's working as designed. Just enough crippled interop to muddy the waters when they're fending off anti-monopoly regulators. But not enough to actually make it viable for people to free themselves from Meta's Chains and move elsewhere in the fediverse. @pcottle Hi Peter, I appreciate every step towards interoperability, but I’m counting from the day Threads launched publicly, since it was supposed to be a federated platform from the beginning. I’d much rather you be able to send me your response to my post directly from your Threads account instead 🙂 |
@Gargron That'd be interesting, but honestly, threads just seems like another world entirely.