this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2023
595 points (96.1% liked)

Fediverse

28494 readers
314 users here now

A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).

If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!

Rules

Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration), Search Lemmy

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A lot of people dislike it for the privacy nightmare that it is and feel the threat of an EEE attack. This will also probably not be the last time that a big corporation will insert itself in the Fediverse.

However, people also say that it will help get ActivityPub and the Fediverse go more mainstream and say that corporations don't have that much influence on the Fediverse since people are in control of their own servers.

What a lot of posts have in common is that they want some kind of action to be taken, whether it'd be mass defederating from Threads, or accept them in some way that does not harm the Fediverse as much.

What actions can we take to deal with Threads?

(page 4) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] count0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"Should 'we' do?"

Nothing. If people and/or communities coming in through Threads are engaging in good faith, cool, more nice folks to have a community with. People/communities engaging in bad faith get blocked/defederated as is already common practice (and seems to be working outstandingly already, looking at average quality of posts and discourse "here" as compared to the "big platforms").

When Meta/Threads is hosting communities I like to see/be a part of, I'll figure out how to subscribe/integrate those. Besides that, they're free and welcome to run echo chambers in their own instances and communities, I don't see how any of that would ever show up on my feed.

[–] ttmrichter@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Threads is Meta. By definition they are not engaging in good faith. Good faith is not a Meta value.

[–] count0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago

Is it (more) about Meta themselves, or rather about individual users, though?

[–] CyanFen@lemmy.one 3 points 1 year ago
[–] Strolleypoley@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Threats is a better name for that data collecting pos.

[–] luckystarr@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In order to compete in user experience we need to up our game. We need to set up communities which collect, categorize and funnel user requests upstream. These features should be focused on:

  • reducing frictions like unclear UI, broken links, etc.
  • improving usability of the various web frontends (the one from Lemmy, kbin, etc.)
  • collecting bug reports and making sure they will be fixed

This is meant to be a proxy between average users and tech enthusiasts who know how to do pull requests or open GitHub issues. Moderators of these communities would do it for them. This would enable us to gain visibility in the needs of the users.

This is only a part of what needs to be done, but I think this can be done quickly.

[–] Ech@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Lemmy doesn't need to compete. Hell, it can't compete. It's an open-source platform developed basically as volunteer work. Meta (and Threads) has millions of dollars and massive teams behind it.

Thankfully, we don't need Meta. We just need to do what we can to resist. The best we can hope for and what we should aim for is to limit the impact/damage Threads will have on our segment of the Fed. How to do that, I'm not sure exactly, but my first instinct is to block off anything corporate. Any interaction at all is basically just asking monied interests to take over.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago

Don't worry. Elon's gonna sue and Zuck will quietly shut Threads down. /s

I've been reading blog posts taking various positions and remain undecided.

[–] Mayoman68@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I'm somewhat undecided here, because ultimately I don't care for federated services to become dominant at all costs, nor do I care if they shrink slightly. I want the users of these services to voluntarily choose them based on the principles that federated social media stands for right now. My personal opinion right now is let them federate, but defederate the minute the "extend" starts. But we'll see.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›