I don't understand what Meta will gain from participating in the fediverse? Their ultimate goal is to make money of Threads and I just don't see how encouraging an open federation will help them do it? Even 3Eing the fediverse will not do them much good as they already have sooo much traffic already that killing the fediverse will not make a serious change in their figures. But OTOH it does seem like Threads is net positive for the fediverse ATM. Even if all current denizens of the fediverse will block Threads, there is a large group of people that are exposed to the concept of "fediverse" for the fist time and some of them will want to learn more. This is a good thing. Anyway, I don't know why they are doing it, but I'm cautiously glad they did it. Thanks for coming to my Ted talk.

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

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

"Mastodon is so hard to understand, at least Threads is easy."

Once people start saying that Meta will be in charge of the fediverse.

[–] cerevant 5 points 1 year ago

If the fediverse wants to retain its independence from Meta, the content producers of significance need to be convinced of the value of being in control of their brand while still having access to the user base of Threads. If the content producers go to Threads, the fediverse becomes irrelevant.

[–] handhookcardoor 4 points 1 year ago

The fediverse is and always will be more than microblogging instances like Threads and Mastodon.

[–] trambe 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Exactly. Ease of use can truly impact the growth of a platform.

Like, I'm sure most people on Lemmy are a bit tech savvy, but the overall user just want to make 1 account and be able to access everything.

Right now, Threads is doing a "good" job by integrating themselves with Instagram. Don't even need to create a new account if you have Insta, just pop in and start using it.