|
Top-level
 [2/2] People have asked me to 'preblock' this project but I am not gonna. Meta is not Gab so we give them a chance and can always block them later with 2 simple button clicks.. We would never ever sell out on you but rather invest time to make this all go smooth without everything come crashing down I hope this clears up some mis-understandings 58 comments
> You won't be happt if your admin starts blocking things without even checking them first I mean, to be fair, you can check this company pretty easily right now, and it's not very good.@stux I thought the whole point of federation was that you just didn't all use one huge server. because as soon as a service with exposure to (potentionally) over a billion user becomes available, original mastodon users will (probably) turn into a rounding error @stux I would be ok as long as they: 1. Had a compelling motivation. 2. Were willing and hoping to re-federate in the case that their suspicions were false or unfounded. Both are true here. This feels incredibly risky. FB needs to prove legitemacy to investors and this looks like it's an atrempt to capture usage from Mastodon and then cut off ActivityPub once they reach critical mass. I don't want to indirectly support that. Please reconsider. You misunderstand the problem here. This is precisely out of Microsoft's ye old "Embrace. Extend. Extinguish" playbook. FB needs to cough up something for investors. They need to show results. They're going to use Mastodon to springboard their new platform with users and content. Then they'll offer a better service, aggressive onboarding, and then eventually cutoff the federation. Finally, enshittification will begin. I don't want to be a part of that. Or provide content to it. @avrin @stux Once upon a time, they did this with XMPP. This is not new, this is not unsubstantiated, this is what they've been doing for YEARS. They have the resources to pull it off, the will, the motivation, and a history of it. This isn't vague reactionary bullshit that I'm pulling out of my ass. This is a likely risk and known factor. Oh, if only. You misunderstand yet again. They will provide a *better* service that ye old FOSS contributor will not be able to provide. They will extend the software, improve it. It'll be great. It'll be amazing. Until they reach market dominance and then start strangling their users for cash. They'll aggressively choke out Mastodon and steal potential adoption numbers. This is the game plan. It always has been. @avrin @stux You say it won't harm us, but it will. People who are on here, or would've been on here, will instead be on there. It'll be an opportunity cost, at the very least. And who was to say that I don't care about the people on that platform anyways? It's amoral to me to be complacent in that. @scirave @stux for one, they made an account there. it is what is. two, having an easier, more recognizable process to getting into the fediverse will only make people realize they should be elsewhere more. anyone that won't move wouldn't have had it never existed. people that are already here aren't gonna move to meta's instance, it's a non issue. @avrin @stux For one, I've been increasingly aware that there are *plenty* of people who would move solely to be in the same place as their friends, followers, and favorite figures. There was a notable amount of attention generated from BlueSky. There is an audience here, I'm not saying it's large. Secondly, more exposure to the fediverse isn't going to fix the E.E.E. issue, what are you not getting here? I came here to be outside corporate influence and not to participate. Many of us did. People moving to FB's "Threads" isn't going to translate to sizable portions moving to Mastodon or other federated services. They are a corporation, they're doing this to springboard. There is no intention to support federation for any longer than it directly benefits them. At the very best? We simply give them free content and advertising. This is objectively bad. FB's history and operating procedures dictates that they'll end up harming users for profit. @avrin @stux They'll provide a better service. Leech potential users, and some existing users. They'll use our community to springboard engagement and showcase sustainability to investors. This is an attempt at prolonging their relevancy and using our services and communities to do it. There is absolutely no benefit here to federate. Them "supporting federation" publicly and having such tools will literally be the extent of the advertising we get from it. There's no reason to let them in. @avrin @stux I want to be wrong. I want to be so, so, so wrong. I hope that I'm wrong. I hope by some miracle, Zuck's heart grew thrice as big overnight and made him all nice and fuzzy inside over the idea of helping a fellow man out. But I severely doubt it. People, discourse, social spaces, will all be damaged and hurt. We will be protected, but not isolated from this. This is a problem. Why is it so hard to see the benefit from distrusting a so-easily-distrustable-provider? @scirave , thank you for saying this! This is exactly what I'm afraid of. We've already seen #Facebook encroach on other platforms that they see as competition, only to then ruin them. I worry that #Meta has similar schemes for Mastodon. They absolutely are not joining the Fediverse because they care about users or decentralization! They only care about their own profits Yes it's a new platform, but it's still the same Facebook. The same horrible company we already know.  All this sounds logical, but it doesn't work for many of us who came here because we didn't want to be anywhere near Facebook. I think the burden of proof should be on #Meta and not on us to tolerate them. #Meta can demonstrate that they can become a healthy participant on the Fediverse by becoming a healthy social media steward on their own platforms before they come here. If they chose not to, well... what makes you think they will do here what they don't do on their own platforms? It doesn't stand scrutiny.  > It's not facebook Meta is working on Dude, it's the same company. Now I'd really like to ask one question and I expect you to be honest. Canary question: 🐦 Did you sign a contract with them, or are in talks that could result in you signing a contract with them? If you can't tell, just say "I can't answer that". Thank you.  @stuxI Sorry. You just lost me. I can't see how leaving this instance is not necessary. This is awful, I feel cheated and betrayed. How much are they offerIng? I'll be recommending mstdn.social be defederated. My instance is pro meta, I will be moving. Which instances are not betraying us? Betrayal. #shame @kevinrns https://fedipact.online/ EDIT: for clarity - the following are instances that have said they will BLOCK META :) EDIT 2: ADMINS, please sign at https://cryptpad.fr/form/#/2/form/view/Xz2YqIlhXIFXCitQApFe6Dp14O54I6vuqTUUgo8WbdM/ here are the larger instances so far (5000+ users): mastodon.social is not a signatory? Has expressed interest in being federated with the racist subversion devices built by Zuckerberg? Anyone? I mean, we don't have a definitive answer from our BDFL, but it looks like dot social will be federating, yeah @smallpatatas @kevinrns @vantablack Hmmm. Maybe I'll try going for a smaller instance. Discuss.systems seems to be more curated to my particular interests anyhow. It'll probably be the one I'll migrate to!  @stux there is a lot of room between "blocking everything by default" and blocking a particular entity preemptively because they have a well-established track record spanning many years of being more than willing, happy even, to harm individuals, businesses, and the internet itself as long as they can derive profit or in some way boost Zuckerberg's (or whichever billionaire's) ego @stux a small entity that has shown no signs of gleefully harming people? of course, give them a chance. let's get to know them a borg-sized and assimilation-inclined entity of infinite resources? nah, let's hold off. it will be far easier to open up to them later than it will be to repair whatever damage is wreaked if and when they pull stunts that no one would ever have expected an honest company to pull  @stux Thanks for that clarification and sharing from your expert position that you see the Fediverse as having the tools to protect itself. My concern would be about the dominating, "own the world," dishonest and manipulative and mass-profit-centric way that zuck works - so would hope that folks have done enough scenario-planning to envision all possibilities/contingencies. Don't understand why he'd want to do this if there was no way to profit/surveil.  @stux We are here because of corporate greed and malfeasance. That has not changed. The fox is coming to the hen house. How many times must we be subjected to the outright manipulation and aggressive abuse of these shareholder run organizations? This isn't about the users. They can be blocked. Please stop defending the corporations' platforms whose sole purpose is to make money off of their users, especially in light of the Reddit debacle. Federation doesn't change the philosophy of a company. Going, betrayed, subverted, going. Just outraged at this awful stupid action. Whatever instance I join will be deferederated from this instance -> mstdn.social. No. @stux For some folks, needing to be cautious and remove them ahead of time is vital. The disability community knows how much "Meta" aka Facebook has coordinated with the Federal government in the US to get people kicked off of their disability benefits. We cannot risk having this massive company mine our toots or whatever else to do this through the Fediverse. People need to be WAY more concerned with just how much surveillance this could result in. @PCOWandre @stux This isn't about blanket open communication. It is about allowing a corporation that allowed absolute vitriol to proliferate their platform in the name of "communication" and free speech. Do you have an active Facebook account? Does anyone who is participating in this narrative have an active Facebook account? And if you don't, why is it that you don't? @stux Thank you, The calls for Pre-blocking or even de-federating Corperate owned servers kind of ruins the idea of "decentralization" and isn't any better than if you don't like a company, you can block it on an individual basis, do not block it for everyone else.  if it was just a heads up why the NDA facebooks business model is at odds with the #fediverse so you can only be skeptical of their intentions facebook like the other techbros know how to play the W3C game, it won't take much for them to destroy AP i've seen EEE nearly destroy the net, with the greatest respect stux just stfu & pre-block them |
Gregory's Server
It's NOT platforms like #Facebook or #Instgram that join the Fediverse ⚠️
Meta is working on a new platform that intends to federate
So it's not everyone on FB or IG that joins but a new crowd probably
We have great moderation tools on Masto and other software that can cut them off within a second if needed
But let's not "block everything by default" but first check..
You won't be happt if your admin starts blocking things without even checking them first
The same rules apply to them also