this post was submitted on 16 Dec 2023
986 points (79.2% liked)
Fediverse
28528 readers
285 users here now
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).
If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!
Rules
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.
Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration), Search Lemmy
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Short-sighted advice from people who don't understand the purpose of ActivityPub.
Yes allowing corps into the Fediverse is very short-sighted.
While I'm cool with blocking threads.net, "we should block all corps from the Fediverse" doesn't make sense and that's a bad cause to focus on
It's fine if an instance wants to make that their policy, the fediverse gives an instance the freedom to do so, but it would provide little gain for a lot of annoyance
Other bad reasons:
We certainly should keep corps at a 1km pole from here.
They come and ruin everything they tough in the name of profit. Can they force their way? Partially, maybe, in some ways. But if we welcome them with open doors, it will get way worse. The last thing we should do is give up and say "they'll get their dirty hands into this anyway".
Let's keep this place tidy of bullshit, pretty please.
We can take precautions against their nonsense by enforcing the standards, and we can educate people about why it's a problem. That becomes difficult if we just close off entirely. We can't have an impact on things we close off to and ignore
I don't think we should give up or welcome them with open doors, I just think there's more nuance to it than "defederate from any fediverse thing tied to a for profit entity"
Facebook's case is special because of their nasty history with control and abuse, so if people want to be extra aggressive with them then I'm good with it
Well, first off - protect yourself, and then manage the rest. I welcome the noble goal of enforcement and policies and education, but it will always be like cathing a slinky.
We should be very vigilant with their presence here, and in this case, we should certainly close off.
Do you understand what corporations do?
I've got some understanding yes
I think most people here have a similar sentiment around corporations and big tech companies, which is why we're on this platform and why we donate to keep them run by nonprofits
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.
am silly ._.
fair enough.
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
You build a bridge. After awhile it might start to decay and without proper upkeep it might even collapse! Better to never build a bridge in the first place.
I'd rather not build a bridge to the land of festering pustules to begin with
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.