1. Meta/Facebook has a horrific track record on human rights:
- https://www.amnesty.org.uk/press-releases/ethiopia-facebook-algorithms-contributed-human-rights-abuses-against-tigrayans
- https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/dec/06/rohingya-sue-facebook-myanmar-genocide-us-uk-legal-action-social-media-violence
- https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/18/17587080/mark-zuckerberg-holocaust-denial-kara-swisher-interview
2. Meta/Facebook is trying to join the Fediverse. We need to defederate them.
3. If you're a server admin, please defederate Meta's domain "threads.net" (here's how on Mastodon https://fedi.tips/how-to-defederate-fediblock-a-server-on-mastodon/)
4. If you don't run your own server, please ask your server admin to defederate "threads.net". Your admin is listed on your server website's About page.
Meta just announced that they are trying to integrate Threads with ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, etc.). We need to defederate them if we want to avoid them pushing their crap into fediverse.
If you’re a server admin, please defederate Meta’s domain “threads.net”
If you don’t run your own server, please ask your server admin to defederate “threads.net”.
I’m snarky because I’m annoyed at seeing the constant FUD being lauded around here. Sorry if that snark comes off as hostile.
Yes, Meta is a shit corp who doesn’t deserve any free pass. However, ActivityPub wasn’t built with exclusion in mind. Nor does the protocol allow Meta access to anything that you aren’t already giving up freely to thousands upon thousands of other servers (many of whom cannot or will not respect your rights to data privacy) whenever you use any Fediverse platform.
People who are scared of Meta joining the Fediverse simply do not understand how the Fediverse works, or misunderstand the design philosophy of ActivityPub.
Yes it was, that’s what defederation is for. The potential for exclusion is literally built into the design philosophy of federated networks. Every instance has the freedom to not host Meta’s crap. I don’t know why people don’t understand this.
You’ve also made the point that the information is still accessible, so it’s not like we’re taking down their instance. We’re just turning it into a pariah to devalue it, and if enough instances do this, I guess that means the action is popular. If it wasn’t, it wouldn’t succeed. There’s very little to debate here, it just sounds like you don’t like people using their power to do something you disagree with. Sorry, that’s up to those people. It’s not for you to dictate what other people do with federation.
Most people on Threads aren’t pro-corporate, they don’t actually give a shit about that. They’re just too confused by the decentralized model to be on Mastodon, couldn’t get an invite to Bluesky, and wanted somewhere to be other than Twitter.
Being connected to it all via Threads could eventually help them get enough understanding to migrate to a different instance.
Likely nothing. If Threads users are problematic and Meta refuses to moderate them appropriately, then instances can defederate later.
Doing it preemptively or forming a pact is just absurd, though. It’s treating the users of Threads as a threat, instead of Meta (who can and will still be able to harvest anything they want from the Fediverse, because that’s how ActivityPub works), and that’s not fair to them who didn’t ask to be thrown into our community in the first place.
If that’s how you want to run your instance, that’s your right to do. But for community-based instances, the users should have some say in the matter.
Yes, I can move to another instance if mine decides to defederate, but that’s a lot of hassle that I’d have to go through because of a decision somebody else made for me, all because they can’t or won’t moderate themselves.
Clearly you haven’t dealt with a Mastodon instance having a major defederation event.
For most users, regardless of the validity of the defed, the user experience is terrible. Their social graph just suddenly, stops working, the people they follow can no longer see their posts, all because of the actions of a few bad actors or administration failures.
This paired with the fact that maybe only Firefish or Misskey lets you (mostly) seamlessly migrate to a new instance with your data intact, and the lack of a standard way to see what followers you will actually keep when you migrate, means that the defederation experience is sucks, and migrating to a different instance to escape that is a pain in the ass.
Meta has already shown it has piss poor moderation in the best of times, and actively boosts incendiary content in the worst of times, all while collecting, profiling, and exploiting your data. It’s literally inevitable that they’re going to break the rules of all but the free-est of free speech Instances, so for the privacy, safety, and headaches of everyone in the fediverse, we might as well save ourselves the trouble.**
So what? People can run kbin or Lemmy as a standalone forum not connected to anything, if they want. People are free to use the software however they see fit. Wouldn’t exactly be the first time people choose to use software in some other way then the authors intended.
It wasn’t a roll-call.
why is snark
I’m snarky because I’m annoyed at seeing the constant FUD being lauded around here. Sorry if that snark comes off as hostile.
Yes, Meta is a shit corp who doesn’t deserve any free pass. However, ActivityPub wasn’t built with exclusion in mind. Nor does the protocol allow Meta access to anything that you aren’t already giving up freely to thousands upon thousands of other servers (many of whom cannot or will not respect your rights to data privacy) whenever you use any Fediverse platform.
People who are scared of Meta joining the Fediverse simply do not understand how the Fediverse works, or misunderstand the design philosophy of ActivityPub.
Yes it was, that’s what defederation is for. The potential for exclusion is literally built into the design philosophy of federated networks. Every instance has the freedom to not host Meta’s crap. I don’t know why people don’t understand this.
You’ve also made the point that the information is still accessible, so it’s not like we’re taking down their instance. We’re just turning it into a pariah to devalue it, and if enough instances do this, I guess that means the action is popular. If it wasn’t, it wouldn’t succeed. There’s very little to debate here, it just sounds like you don’t like people using their power to do something you disagree with. Sorry, that’s up to those people. It’s not for you to dictate what other people do with federation.
have different problem
platform owned by corporation tends to have more pro corporate users
what happens to existing culture on fediverse
is general trend that online communities get worse when above threshold
Most people on Threads aren’t pro-corporate, they don’t actually give a shit about that. They’re just too confused by the decentralized model to be on Mastodon, couldn’t get an invite to Bluesky, and wanted somewhere to be other than Twitter.
Being connected to it all via Threads could eventually help them get enough understanding to migrate to a different instance.
threads can still have more pro business people than fediverse
does analogy about non-technical topic work better
Except I have no idea WTF that reply means so good luck getting threads users to understand it.
._.
Try using actual sentences to express yourself, it’s more effective.
Likely nothing. If Threads users are problematic and Meta refuses to moderate them appropriately, then instances can defederate later.
Doing it preemptively or forming a pact is just absurd, though. It’s treating the users of Threads as a threat, instead of Meta (who can and will still be able to harvest anything they want from the Fediverse, because that’s how ActivityPub works), and that’s not fair to them who didn’t ask to be thrown into our community in the first place.
problem often cause damage before is addressed
pre block be safer
threads users signed up for threads
deleted by creator
I’d rather not build a bridge to the land of festering pustules to begin with
deleted by creator
If that’s how you want to run your instance, that’s your right to do. But for community-based instances, the users should have some say in the matter.
Yes, I can move to another instance if mine decides to defederate, but that’s a lot of hassle that I’d have to go through because of a decision somebody else made for me, all because they can’t or won’t moderate themselves.
If you don’t like decisions somebody else makes for you, then run your own instance.
This isn’t meant to be snarky, btw, it’s a valid solution and one of the freedoms of the fediverse system.
hold vote
Clearly you haven’t dealt with a Mastodon instance having a major defederation event.
For most users, regardless of the validity of the defed, the user experience is terrible. Their social graph just suddenly, stops working, the people they follow can no longer see their posts, all because of the actions of a few bad actors or administration failures.
This paired with the fact that maybe only Firefish or Misskey lets you (mostly) seamlessly migrate to a new instance with your data intact, and the lack of a standard way to see what followers you will actually keep when you migrate, means that the defederation experience is sucks, and migrating to a different instance to escape that is a pain in the ass.
Meta has already shown it has piss poor moderation in the best of times, and actively boosts incendiary content in the worst of times, all while collecting, profiling, and exploiting your data. It’s literally inevitable that they’re going to break the rules of all but the free-est of free speech Instances, so for the privacy, safety, and headaches of everyone in the fediverse, we might as well save ourselves the trouble.**
So what? People can run kbin or Lemmy as a standalone forum not connected to anything, if they want. People are free to use the software however they see fit. Wouldn’t exactly be the first time people choose to use software in some other way then the authors intended.