People are taking this NDA thing out of context. Like it was just a NDA about what they are talking about in a meeting, most likely because of mutual interests and Meta using the code under license, and looking to fund and how to contribute. I mean, I don’t trust them or want anything to do with them really, but the world is not black and white. A lot of open source projects with no ulterior use are funded by Meta. It is not like a meeting means this is getting taken over. This knee jerk reaction is having a real, negative, effect on the developers. This is open source. We can always fork. There is nothing to pitchfork and picket about. It is entirely counter productive.
How much is known and is based on fact when it comes to this meta fediverse stuff?
I agree that it’s probably going to be bad. But I can see no harm in waiting until details of the plan become clear before committing to a response.
Who knows there might end up being upsides, and if not, the option to defederate will remain available at every stage. That’s the beauty of having an adaptive decentralized network.
For a taste of how Facebook might be able to coopt the fediverse, look at how federated email is mostly controlled by Google and Microsoft.
