TL;DR: The common view on Meta’s Threads is that it will be either all good or all bad, leading to oversimplified and at the end contra productive propositions like the Fedipact. But in reality, it’s behaviour will most likely change dynamically over time, and therefore, to prevent us getting in a position, in which Threads can actually perform EEE on us, we need to adapt a dynamic strategy as well.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] F_Haxhausen@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago (2 children)

They will take everything and shit on it.

What’s the point in being here if the corporations are coming here?

[–] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

We'll probably have to move to a new internet. Dibs on calling it the "Freediverse".

[–] F_Haxhausen@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

Before, in the olden times, the internet was just a bunch of random websites and forums and IRC AND USEnet.

Now it’s, “Where SHOULD I GO to be seen others and be validated?!?!”

I sound old. And I am. But,

[–] capital@lemmy.world -2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Do you people want others on fedi or not? Jesus Christ.

Devs: make thing

Others: use thing

You: stop it!

[–] F_Haxhausen@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I just thought the fediverse was going to be free of corporate/advertising/tracking shit-show.

If it isn’t going to be free of corporate bullshit why be here instead of Instagram or Twitter or Facebook?

What is the difference? None.

I used to care. But now? I don’t care where people go on the internet. Why be invested in fediverse if the fediverse is just another FaceBook?

[–] blue_berry@lemmy.ca 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

For me its not about corporate/non-corporate. I think it would already hugely improve the situation if social networking wouldn't be controlled by one monopoly.

It's the same with E-Mail and RSS. It's working fine because there is no monopoly.