Recherches récentes
Options de recherche
The recent excitement surrounding Thread's arrival on the Fediverse is concerning. To understand why this is not a good idea, consider their economic interest in harvesting data, their poor moderation, and their manipulations. Nothing good can come from their federation. Don't roll out the red carpet for them.
AdoraBeryl 
@davidrevoy Reminds me of Death from Discworld. Beautiful art.
@acrypthash @davidrevoy Death on Discworld was ultimately on people’s side, though. The same cannot be said for Meta.
@davidrevoy very powerful picture - we must not repeat the same mistakes as have been made before! Corporations could not care less about interoperability. All we do is lend them our built community and power, for which they will drop support the moment it suits their interests. Google Hangouts never needed to support XMPP, it was just a convenient tool in order for a decentralized and anticorporate alternative to messaging to be destroyed - when it no longer suited their needs XMPP support was dropped.
Don't let this happen to the Fediverse - corporate, ad-mania, and data harvesting corporations do not share our values and beliefs.
@davidrevoy
I see some instances have blocked threads…I imagine they’re going to become popular if this goes through. I’ve paid for my instance, but am unlikely to stay if Zuck is give a key.
my first thought when I hear someone works at facebook is.... ewww
@davidrevoy
And they'll probably do it better than the MIT guy.
It's true that they'll provide approximately nothing of value, but at least for a glorious 24h we get to call the normiest normies niggers.
@davidrevoy Everything is public. They can already harvest the fedi data if they want.
@diondokter @davidrevoy not necessarily, some instances require an authenticated API to access anything. they also want to integrate into our social graphs so they can get leverage over us
@davidrevoy a read of Threads ToS should be enough to make people worry.
@Sh4d0w_H34rt @davidrevoy as if people will read that.
We had a twitter influx of folks that all moved here with their friends and just carried on with their same old ways. They do not care what the platform is, they just care that their friends are here so they can all whinge about politics and climate change without doing anything tangible.
They care nought for any ToS, not even the one of the server they reside on in a lot of cases.
@snott @davidrevoy the prevailing culture here is one of privacy. Will there be those who don't read the terms? Yes. Should we ignore the dangers of those terms and say nothing? HELL NO!
@Sh4d0w_H34rt @davidrevoy oh I whole heartedly agree!
Just outlining what I have seen.
@davidrevoy
Zuckerturd...
@davidrevoy Also, time to popularize #FediArt instead of #MastoArt. #FediArt is less tied with a 'product' 
Also this "...last technical issues together with *Mastodon engineers*".
So developers and engineers working on other Fediverse software have been left out?
@davidrevoy It's a good things to see "big company" looking at open standard instead of closed one like BlueSky or X does
But looking stats on fediverse (https://fediverse.observer/stats) there's around ~13,000,000 users on ~22000servers: having the ~140,000,000 users from threads in fediverse will probably generate a huge disorder...
Also, probably most of threads users are ex-twitter users without habits of fediverse 
Most of servers admin will probably block thread 
@davidrevoy Definitely not an easy discussion. Meta as a company deserves all the criticism, and I do not trust them at all.
But … we always advocate for free and open services and protocols. Now that we get them, we say "no, not like that!" This is what we wanted, this is how we get users to interact with the fediverse, how we show them how easy it is to use privacy respecting services, this is how we get them to switch.
Instead we build walls, exclude them, make it difficult and unappealing.
@davidrevoy @jug I completely agree. If we want the fediverse to be a real competition to the established social media, this is a good thing. Now it is actually viable for people to follow politics/celebrity gossip/friends/etc on threads, so they can remove or stop using threads.
A very good user friendly app might be a good hook to convince people to use the fediverse, as many people won’t switch exclusively for the privacy benefits.
Why Not Zoidberg? 
@jug @davidrevoy you think Fedi users care about free and open protocols? A majority of Maston users doesn't care.
@jug @davidrevoy well said! And maybe the users will change their server once they see the alternative. (that's what I hope)
Who's "we"? I'm not interested in having anyone here who didn't actively decide to come here.
If someone decides to leave here to follow celebrity gossip or specific brand marketing pap on Threads, more power to them.
I've already blocked threads.net, and will likely move to an instance that does the same going forward.
@jug @davidrevoy I am riding this same reasoning. I dont want to be excluding of Threads *users*. However, Meta has been quite the bad actor. And I dont see a reason to trust them. Meta does not get a do-over cause they made a new platform. Which of course, following that reasoning would exclude the users.
I wonder if this is the same discussion with Tumblr's federation, who doesnt have nearly the same reputation. But, Meta's rep -is- something to consider.
@davidrevoy that’s as beautiful as the background is ugly. Thank you for sharing!
@davidrevoy Anyone can data farm off of ActivityPub. We should welcome Threads with open arms. #Threads #ActivityPUb #Welcome
@davidrevoy I agree, David.
@davidrevoy Just login and see for yourself how bad the content is. This is Instagram only with more words.
This is yet another social network for content and not for discussion.
Mark Zuckerberg ist unable to re invent Social Media!
@davidrevoy nice drawing, I have to say. Nice picture. Exactly shows what you mean, your point.
@davidrevoy If I may ask, what kind of solutions do you have in mind?
@myrmidon I have no idea. I'm just a user. I understand those who are already defederated with them (as my instance), I understand those who are 'waiting and seeing'. But I'm also deeply concerned about those who praise this situation and try to normalise it as something positive. I don't see anything positive in it and I just wanted to say it.
@davidrevoy It’s happening and once it’s on, it will be bigger than all of SocialWeb before them (at least an order of magnitude).
And people "there" are normal people, not fascists, rapists, murderers, etc.
So what does this ban mean exactly?
Let’s take to another level: You live in France, one of france telco HR policies are so bad that some of its employes are killing themselves citing work… again. Do you think you should ban calls/texts with anyone using their SIMs or landlines?
@myrmidon @davidrevoy
The problem is not people. It is Meta.
(And I also believe growing the Fedi as much as possible is playing a game we already lost since it doesn't NEED to grow to survive.)
@Zekovski @davidrevoy Google has a lot of issues too. Is your mail provider blocking all traffic from/to google mail services ?
@myrmidon @davidrevoy
It's not about blocking Meta because they are bad.
Gmail is actually an example of what could happen :
It is now in a monopoly position. Hence they can and do change how email distribution work to their advantage.
Smaller actors are at a disadvantage because they have to keep up in order to be compatible, but they have less ressources. So people use gmail to have something "that works".
@myrmidon @davidrevoy
The actual fear is this. Letting Meta take control of how the fediverse works.
It is explained in detail here if you're interested :
https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html
@Zekovski @davidrevoy Thank you. I’ll make time later today.
Of course we should!
If a company is so bad that it causes deaths (as Facebook is, see the Myanmar example), we should NOT accommodate their users. Those users should realize they are feeding an evil corporation and leave!
If not federating with META makes a 1/1000 of a percent of their users realize this and leave, that would be a great victory.
@axnxcamr @davidrevoy Nobody will leave threads because of this. Normal people will leave Mastodon instances that don’t federate and people with utter moral values will be isolated. What a great way to live. 
Refusing to give in to evil corporations, yeah, I'd say it's a great way to live.
@axnxcamr @davidrevoy yes. But forcing upon others is a the root of every totalitarism.
You’ve probably seen that some instances that preemptively banned are re-considering as their users are not happy.
Comm tolds are here to help us communicate with everybody we want, no decide with whom we can.
People won’t change instance, they will go to Threads.
I don't know, we'll see.
I still think letting Threads in will be the end of Fedi and AP. I'm not the first to think like that, won't be the last either.
@axnxcamr @davidrevoy It is the end of the experimentation and the start of SocialWeb Everybody will finally have an inbox.
I hope next step is Instagram joining.
@axnxcamr @davidrevoy I don’t like not owning the domain part (web, mail, socialweb, …) so do I have a number of instances of various kinds.
But for parents, siblings, children, etc that don’t have someone like me to run IT, we need something like threads like we needed something like gmail.
Mastodon is "hostile" to normal people. We’ve seen it during both waves for Twitter exodus.
"Forcing upon others" is a false argument. It's like saying Chinese restaurants are forcing their food upon their customers because they are not offering Mexican food.
You want Mexican, go to a Mexican restaurant.
You want to connect with Threads users? Create a Threads account.
What Fedi offers is an environment free of corporate shit, ads and whatnot. Federating with Threads goes against that.
@axnxcamr @davidrevoy SocialWeb protocols are like SMTP. Nothing else.
If people want to live isolated, good for them, I am glad. The rest of humanity will happily federate without them.
I’m sure some people refuse to exchange emails with people hosted by Google or Microsoft…. Does anyone care? no.
@axnxcamr @davidrevoy The company I was referring to is worse, people are killing themselves because of work conditions (a CEO has been convicted for a first "wave").
So what do we don’t, we ask our phone to bar us from calling/answering 40% cellphones, 70% landlines ?
We all have our own level of "worse".
"Facilitating genocides" would be my idea of worse.
YMMV
@axnxcamr @davidrevoy I don’t know the details but I guess they didn’t facilitate, they didn’t act to make it more difficult for people to organize on Fb (i guess that was on Fb).
If they did facilitate, MZ would be facing charges in La Hague.
It’s terrible but it’s legally different.
@davidrevoy On the original announcement post by Zuck on the federation testing of Threads https://www.threads.net/@zuck/post/C0zXcQmxO77/ there are multiple replies of people complaining about the sheer number of porn bots, accounts spreading misinformation, conspiracy theories, propaganda, and other stuff like that on Threads. I can't verify any of that myself as I don't use Threads (or Instagram for that matter), but I definitely don't need to see those kinds of posts and accounts on my feed thank you very much.
@davidrevoy An open web requires open protocols, so I'm okay with #Threads opting into the ActivityPub protocol, if it actually ever does. But it hasn't. Not yet. I'm also okay with certain servers being insular and excluding Threads. Kinda strange to do this before we know how Threads will approach the fediverse, but #socialmedia lives and breathes on this kind of thing. And the Fediverse is built to handle it too. @rwg
@davidrevoy You're right. And it's worth knowing what ELSE Facebook/Meta knowingly allows on its services: https://creativegood.com/blog/23/instagrams-unmentionable-problem.html
@davidrevoy We should be rightfully alarmed by this. We don't want to be integrated into the Zuckusphere