It should come as no surprise that the lemmy.ml admin team took about 2 minutes to decide to pre-emptively block threats / Meta. Their transparent and opportunistic scheme to commodify the fediverse and it’s users will not be allowed to proceed.
We strongly encourage other instance administrators to do the same, given the grave threat they pose to the fediverse.
If meta gathers a ton of users and then defederates, then wouldn’t we just be back to exactly where we are right now?
No, because they want you to get hooked to their content, like a drug. The third step of EEE is where they draw people away from open standards into their walled gardens. This was in the comment I linked you.
If the biggest fediverse communities are all ones on meta, then after they get the fediverse addicted to their communities, they’ll draw everyone who was on it out.
I still don’t understand how that would kill the fediverse though. The people who want meta content can make accounts on meta services. They’re obviously not going to convince you and I to sign up there. And i would guess most others on the fediverse right now are people like us who are happy to be moving away from companies like meta and twitter. If there’s some mass exodus where all the meta fanboys left lemmy, i think the rest of us would be okay with that.
Now if they actually find a way to break the activity pub standard, then that would be a serious threat, but I’m not sure how defederating would solve that.
It’s been explained already, if you don’t understand or believe it that’s fine.
There are other issues beyond EEE however. If Meta can federate with an instance, it can collect all the available data within that instance. Cambridge Analitica would love that. Also meta blurs the line between content and advertising and that type of advertising is not healthy to federate with.
EXACTLY, so kindly stop arguing with people telling you that Lemmy users should not let them into this backyard due to Meta’s history. You’re being willfully ignorant and combative here while refusing to be persuaded by the people telling you exactly why it’s a bad idea. You both don’t understand (or won’t) and are STILL arguing your point anyway.
If your arguments can’t be distinguished from legit astroturfing, then you’re obviously making terrible pro-corporate arguments on a decidedly anti-corporate platform. Read the room and take the freaking hint.