(Sorry for bad english not my first language)

I am pretty sure most of us can agree on how bad Meta is and for some reason people are defending Meta.

I think many people is not realising how Threads and Federation with Threads is going to harm the development of Fediverse.

I dont think many people realize how Threads itself is going to harm fediverse. After twitters well known series dumb moves, many people saw this as an opportunity for fediverse to rise. But with Threads, essentially a 1 to 1 copy of twitter, just going to scoop all of that twitter refugees. Not just that but Threads is using fediverse as ready to consume content farm and eventually cause some users to migrate out of fediverse to Threads because “Well i can stay in touch with near circle easly while still being in fediverse” and after getting enough profits they will defederate themselves because there is not enought to gain from at that point. They will suck the life juice out of Fediverse.

Also as you know threads is tightly integrated with Instagram which made many Instagram users dove head first into Threads and this caused Instagram and Threads culture to be identical. And i think you can guess how bad Instagram culture is. Threads is just a breeding ground companies and influencers with high levels of toxicity and homophobia almost instantly. And we dont want this culture to infintirate Fediverse (Right?) More on the culture. Many threads users are going to destroy the thing we have. Fediverse will never get popular as FAANG Platforms whatever we do. Why we are trying to bring Hateful, Censorship oriented Instagram culture to fediverse. Why?

Also no, Threads is not going to contribute to Fediverse in users because why would a user will leave meta’s ecosystem and getting into this confusing things about fediverse while they can experience fediverse from Threads? Your average Threads user is not going to care about Fediverse.

We need to defederate from Threads to prevent them from profiting off fediverse. Defederating WILL DO SHIT unlike people says. This will make fediverse read-only to Threads which might emphasize some people to join fediverse to contrubite to it. Defederating essentially take the main point Meta wants with Fediverse. the engagement.

Edit 1: Sorry i was a bit aggresive in the post. Also i reinstalles threads to see how shittie this app is after a bit more maturizing and i already sae a couple scams

Edit 2: DELETED

Edit 3: Nope, Threads community does not fit overall fediverse community and i think we defederate.

  • Matt@lemmy.worldEnglish
    113·
    1 年前

    It’s not that complicated.

    Threads is another instance that brings people to the Fediverse, and people like the idea that they can stay on their instances while still interacting with the world at large. For many people, having everyone on the Fediverse is the goal, and in fact, is a long-term goal of most of the platforms - the “Fediverse” is not meant to be a sort of closed community only for marginalised people to get away from the corporate web, it’s for everyone to use in whatever way they see fit.

    There is literally nothing more to discuss if you’re wondering why people “defend” Threads.

      • Matt@lemmy.worldEnglish
        51·
        1 年前

        And that’s fine, the Fediverse gives you tools to not have to deal with that through silencing or defederation.

        But for many people on the Fediverse, they’re here specifically for other things, and being able to interact with the corporate social web from outside of it is ideal for them.

        Note that I’m not arguing for or against here, it’s just very easy to see why many aren’t interested in defederating.

        • TooLameForLemmy@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          1 年前

          And that’s fine, the Fediverse gives you tools to not have to deal with that through silencing or defederation.

          But for many people on the Fediverse, they’re here specifically for other things, and being able to interact with the corporate social web from outside of it is ideal for them.

          But that’s seems to go directly against what the Fediverse was built for. They say that “The fediverse is a collection of community-owned, ad-free, decentralised, and privacy-centric social networks.” Threads seems to be the antithesis of that. If people do want that, they can find a different platform or create their own. Not coop the Fediverse.

          • infotainment@lemmy.worldEnglish
            01·
            1 年前

            The Fediverse is just a term for “social networks that use ActivityPub”

            Imagine if Facebook offered RSS feeds. That’d be nice right? It wouldn’t ruin anyone’s experience if they started supporting an open standard like that.

            Supporting ActivityPub is no different. It will let people on third party clients connect to Facebook properties. Don’t want to do that? You don’t have to!

    • Kethal@lemmy.worldEnglish
      4·
      1 年前

      Part of federation is the ability to choose whom you interact with. Email is federated and everyone accepts that you can block certain bad faith actors. The notion that federation implies that everyone can use it in whatever way they see fit doesn’t mean that everyone needs to interact with each other. Facebook is a bad faith actor, and it can go play by itself.

      • Matt@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        1 年前

        Your comment doesn’t really contradict anything I said, and I agree with you.

        I don’t subscribe to the idea that the Fediverse means everyone should have to interact with everyone, to be clear, but people absolutely have the choice to federate with those we may consider bad actors, and then we can respond in kind.

        I am all for defederation of bad actors, I’m mostly just explaining why others are not against the defederation of Threads.

      • infotainment@lemmy.worldEnglish
        11·
        1 年前

        Let’s consider your email example – I don’t like a lot of stuff Google has done. By your proposed rules, should, say, ProtonMail block all emails from Gmail to prove a point?