/kbin meta

6 readers

1 users here now

Magazine dedicated to discussions about the kbin itself. Provide feedback, ask questions, suggest improvements, and engage in conversations related to the platform organization, policies, features, and community dynamics. ---- * Roadmap 2023 * m/kbinDevlog * m/kbinDesign

founded 2 years ago

110

Could we get official word on what Kbin's stance is towards federating with Meta? (kbin.social)

submitted 1 year ago by Roundcat@kbin.social to c/kbinMeta@kbin.social

206 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I would like to know if I can feel safe here, or if I should pack it up and start looking elsewhere sooner rather than later.

If the kbin staff have already made there intentions clear, please let me know.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Xylia@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You’ve summed up pretty much exactly how I feel.

The Fediverse solutions are better because of interoperability. While I feel Meta needs to be watched closely as far as their moves and intentions in the space, I’m worried by shutting out any large company projects utilizing the Fediverse, the concept will never “take off”.

And I’ve seen some argue that they don’t want it to take off. That they’d prefer the Fediverse stay niche, and I wholly disagree. The way this is all designed allows each user to choose the experience they’re going for, and shoehorning the entire Fediverse into some vision of a fringe and niche network that no influencers or corporate interests are on at all, is just begging for it to stay irrelevant forever.

Ideally, we wind up in a situation where Meta content can easily be filtered away by any individual user, should they feel that is necessary. But if Threads takes off, I’d rather be able to interact with that content from right here than have to actually become a user of their entire platform.

[–] okawari@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm not against corporations integrating with the fediverse, but I do think that federating with Meta will be a net negative for the fediverse as a whole, atleast in its current state.

First of all, In a purely practical sense, since we're still struggling to keep different instances in sync with the amount of content that is here today. We're going to have a real bad time trying to sync threads content, while they can probably sync the rest of the fediverse without breaking a sweat. I am afraid that we're going to drastically increase the compute necessary to maintain a cohesive fediverse, and that we're just going to hand Meta the keys to the castle as they are the only one able to provide this service at that scale. This is probably less of an issue for Mastodon, where you subscribe to users and not communities.

Furthermore, I'll come out and say that I like that this place is more niche. I've found a lot more joy posting here than i did on reddit or twitter, despite the lower user count. I don't think that access to a large user base is necessarily going to make this a better place for the group that is here now. I think we as a fediverse needs to grow a bit as a community before we can even hope to take in Meta without it warping the entire community to the point that its no longer itself.

[–] PabloDiscobar@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

People don't get the technicalities of syncing so much data. And I'm not even talking about the costs.

Imagine the face of your sysadmin when you tell him that you're gonna run a carbon copy of Threads on his infrastructure. They haven't seen the size of the archive of reddit.

One day it would be fun to talk about the costs though.