/kbin meta

639 readers

1 users here now

Magazine dedicated to discussions about the kbin itself. Provide feedback, ask questions, suggest improvements, and engage in conversations related to the platform organization, policies, features, and community dynamics. ---- * Roadmap 2023 * m/kbinDevlog * m/kbinDesign

founded 1 year ago

128

Could we get official word on what Kbin's stance is towards federating with Meta? (kbin.social)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

206 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I would like to know if I can feel safe here, or if I should pack it up and start looking elsewhere sooner rather than later.

If the kbin staff have already made there intentions clear, please let me know.

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

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What OP did not mention is the fedipact. There are seemingly admins of the fediverse signing an NDA with facebook. The fedipact is about admins swearing that they will never federate with facebook.

So of course if an admin signs an agreement with facebook and changes the conditions, the protocol, benefits from credits to improve the infra then it's a different threat and different debate.

Federating with Meta without an agreement is a laughable science fiction scenario, but federating with an agreement is dangerous for the users.

I would treat meta like any other instance, if its a source of headache then deferate.

If we federate with meta then our instance will simply stop responding because of the workload alone.

Everyone agreeing to defederate from meta won't mean they stop. It won't prevent EEE.

No. If we are talking about the EEE side of things then we must defederate. If facebook federates with the intention of EEE then they will ALSO bribe the admins.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

The code for mastodon, lemmy and kbin is open source and has been forked hundreds of times.

Admins can do whatever they like and people can build and deploy their own instance and enforce their own rules.

This is one of the key strengths of open source, people have forked projects took them in their own direction and had success.

Similarly ActivityPub is documented as a W3 standard, having read the standard the biggest weakness is the number of instances, not the size of the instances.

Also @mod I meant to hit reply and hit report and can't see how to revoke