this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2023
73 points (98.7% liked)

Blahaj Lemmy Meta

2230 readers
4 users here now

Blåhaj Lemmy is a Lemmy instance attached to blahaj.zone. This is a group for questions or discussions relevant to either instance.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The Mastodon instances that I'm a member of have all preemptively defederated and I am very supportive. Just occurred to me we could still see the threads folks over here. What do you guys think? How does this instance feel about Meta?

EDIT: Admin response her https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/728123

top 32 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 39 points 1 year ago

I can't remember in which community I saw the link to this article, so I'll add it there just in case given it's very relevant: How to Kill a Decentralised Network (such as the Fediverse) (TL;DR: it already happened several times, by having the big corpo enter the network as the first step)

I'm personally in favour of defederating from/blocking everything owned/operated by Meta.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 1 year ago

I haven’t seen any discussion of it here, but I’m all in favour of preemptive blocking. Meta/FB/IG cannot and must not be trusted to be a good fediverse citizen (government? instance-nation? I’m not sure how my own metaphor should work. 😆). Give an inch, they’ll take a mile.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

yeah... just finished preemptively defederating my personal instance from threads, and from any instance that seems to want to federate with Meta. hoping we follow a similar tack here

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago

I don't want anything Zuck made to get anywhere near my data. We should defederate and never look back.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago

Yeah, I would prefer if this place just pre-emptively defederates Threads. Since while unlikely to be able to really view lemmy posts properly, I still rather it not be able to be seen at all. I dont want them to embrace extend extinguish and so need to pre-emptively prevent that.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Calckey screenshot of Ada (one of the admins) saying "Hi all Blåhaj Zone has pre-emptively silenced the Meta owned instance threads.net. This is not a complete block, but instead places limits on the federation of content between instances. threads.net users will need to be manually approved by you before they can follow you, and the only threads.net content you will be able to see is from people you explicitly follow."

I assume the plan is the same for Lemmy as it is for Calckey

Edit: screenshot of Ada saying "Well, that didn't take long. Though threads.net is not yet federating with the wider fediverse, they are currently home to several hate groups such as Libs of Tik Tok and their ilk. We will not federate with any instance that knowingly chooses to house hate speech, so a full defederation of threads.net has been made"

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

I assume the plan is the same for Lemmy as it is for Calckey

Yep! We're mirroring block lists between the two instances

[–] oryx 12 points 1 year ago

My eloquent thoughts of "fuck Meta" should sum it up quite nicely.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We have completely blocked and defederated from threads given the uncontrolled transphobia taking place there

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Weird, when I go into Instances, it only shows lemmygrad and exploding heads in the Blocked Instances. Threads.net is still in the Linked Instances column. Is this correct?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

That was the hacker having fun. Fixed now

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago

i really don't care about whatever commercial potential could exist there, id prefer to avoid interacting with meta as much as possible

[–] DevCat 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

It would be nice to see meta's TOS concerning federation first. If it's not egregious, like Facebook, it would be good to volunteer an instance to connect with them, similar to putting a toe in the water.

I've just read through the Mastodon/Threads FAQ, and, so far, I'm ok with it.

https://blog.joinmastodon.org/2023/07/what-to-know-about-threads/

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

My biggest problem with that blog post is Eugene seems convinced that Mastodon's brand is sufficient enough to prevent EEE. I really think he is missing the fact that his own distaste for fairly popular features makes Mastodon fairly easy to poach users from.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What sort of features? I haven’t really used Mastodon as I was never much for Twitter.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Quote toots are the obvious one (although full disclosure: I don't like them either). Some instances and alternative Fediverse servers have a maximum character count substantially greater than that of Mastodon's default.

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

I can see keeping the character count low potentially having a technical advantage in terms of propagation time for posts.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Quote toots

Yeah, I'mm'a need you to elaborate on that one.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

See that’s one of the few things I know about Mastodon. They’re called Toots instead of Tweets. Why though, I could not tell you.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Twitter has this thing where you can retweet something and add your own context to it. Eugen has resisted adding this to Mastodon for a long time, although I understand that it's in the works now, citing the tendency for the feature to be used as a way of getting one's followers to pile on somebody else's post. On the other hand, some communities have cited this as a very important way of how they've used the birdsite, although I don't understand how exactly and don't wish to mischaracterise their arguments.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think I know what you were trying to post but the image didn't attach.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Weird, and thanks for letting me know, must be an issue of sharing between servers... I can see the pic from my side at this address but I just got notified about your comment, 8h after you posted it

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

TOS can change at their whim. Even if the TOS started out decent it would change as soon as they were established. Severing threads once the user base is entrenched would be much more difficult than not allowing federation from the start.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

Torn because I like seeing the bigger people (ok mostly just the Crit Role cast) I used to follow on Twitter without using Twitter but also the fact that there's no moderation and there's already people posting genocidal threats against trans people...

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

It depends on how well they can be trusted with having access to all the data we would be sharing with them.

Since the answer for "how much can we trust Meta with any amount of data" is "not at all", that's an easy "defederate immediately".

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I seem to be on the minority, but while we should be very skeptical of meta, I don't think we should preemptively defederate. I think there is a place for a "commercial" fediverse product because there will always be people who just want to stick to known brands. It could work as a nice intermediary or introduction for people who can then join a non-commercial instance. The main concern imo is what kind of data they will (or can?) mine from users on other iterations. If they just focus on data mining from their own users, I vote to stay federated.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If they get into the lemmy space, the risk is that we'll wind up with a bunch of big / important communities hosted on their servers, making it harder down the road to defederate from them. Would be easy for it to snowball into the embrace, extend, exterminate paradigm, in a way much easier than on Mastodon, where nobody can control a hashtag.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I honestly think the bigger risk is corporate incentivized cultural homogeneity. Kind of like we saw with reddit and all of the astroturfing that goes on over there.

[–] PopularUsername 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Honestly sounds like paranoid ramblings, never heard of this EEE thing before and now it's as though this is a well known phenomenon. All successful open-source projects will interact with and be used by commercial entities. If it's superior, others will use it, and others will use it to make money. If the network is not currently resilient enough to be able to incorporate the capitalists (crony or other otherwise) then at what point will it? This excuse will always exist. An open source project should be able to lean into this and be able to navigate it, rather than segregate like some wimpy monopolist.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

The technology is open-source, the community is not. If we open the community to the corpos, we, as the community, will suddenly be part of the financial success of said corpos. They will take our data for their own use, and our interactions will make them money as well through engagement via their own interfaces.

They can use the Fediverse technology as much as they want, but I'm heavily against them using my personal data.

load more comments
view more: next ›