FB has proven time and again that they don't care to moderate their spaces, and they increase engagement by presenting the most toxic and angering things to you. Community groups in particular are absolutely hideous on there, full of people angry at the (insert minority group) walking down the street. I don't want that in my life again, and I don't want it infecting lemmy. If I did want to engage with that type of content, I'd make an account on Threads.

That said, I'm not out here making demands of our admin and moderators right now. They're busy just keeping this place running. The threads situation won't be going away tomorrow, so it can wait a hot minute.

One concern would be:

1. Say Lemmy/kbin grows organically to 1 million users.
2. Threads federates, with 100 million users

Do you want these users flooding Lemmy? I don't want to be biased at the theoretical type of user on Threads, though if the right wingers/trolls/extremists migrate to Threads because they think it's "more open" then that may be an issue. If it's full of soccer moms posting pictures of their kids, or karens complaining about everything, that may be an issue.

Multiculturalism is great, I want to hear new ideas, though some areas are breeding grounds for lower-think, it seems. This probably sounds prejudiced or elitist.

I want to talk to the vanguard people who take the risk and are openminded and come to lemmy, not necessarily the "lemmings" who join facebook because they love facebook and don't want to, or can't, delve deeper into why facebook is one of the worst forces in media at the moment.

I am not prejudiced (I hope) against "regular people" and "soccer moms", though think that if 10 million soccer moms came here, the discussions may not be as... interesting, as they are.

Also, I don't know what lemmy instances will think about downloading masses of data from threads.

Because this is reminiscent of what happened with XMPP. In the old days you had many closed source protocols for instant messaging. Then XMPP came along and started gaining steam. At that point, major platforms started using it, with everything federated. Someone with Google could talk to someone on Facebook and with someone on myown.sillyserver.net. Everything was going great. But obviously the majority of people went with the easy option to go with Facebook or Google, meaning you still had a federated network on the paper, but with a few actors weighing way more than most.

Obviously at that point, they slowly defederated, preventing their customers from talking to their contacts on other platforms. But most of their contacts where on the same platform, so the cost of migrating was higher. That's how the federation ended. XMPP still exists, and was actually used by WhatsApp in a non federated way, but it is the shell of itself with not a lot of people using it.

A social network strength is in its number. Accepting Meta into Fediverse creates a very real risk that they will try an embrace and extinguish strategy and in the end you will have most people on Meta and just a niche of people on Lemmy/Mastodon, similar to how it was a few months ago.

The goal of the fediverse is to find the proper balance between having multiple platforms big enough so that moderation and technical management can be done by knowledgeable people, but small enough that they cannot decide willy nilly to defederated. Having Meta in the fediverse would very probably break that balance.

It's a combination of EEE (Engage, Enhance, Extinguish) tactics, as well as toxicity overload. Meta are notorious for manipulating their viewers. Threads will rapidly devolve into rage bait, since this gives maximum engagement. They will use us to dilute the resultant toxicity. Once it's established, even de-federating might not be enough. It could generate a locust like influx of toxic new members. The federation doesn't have the community robustness to absorb that sort of hit right now.

Read up on EEE (embrace, extend, extinguish).

I also don’t understand the issue. I’m against meta / twitter / reddit (hence my account here), but how does Threads bring about a degraded experience in any way for lemmy.world users? I feel like if anything this is a great way to get more people comfortable with the concept of the fediverse and push them one step closer to breaking away from the traditional social media companies. So far all I’ve been able to see is “Meta bad, defederate”.

For me it's mostly because massive corporations love to destroy any possible competition. It has happened repeatedly in history. See: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish

I came to lemmy because I hate all those guys and I don't want one coming in and destroying it. Meta has absolutely no incentive to help the fediverse. He is here for the free code, to fuck with Elon, and destroy some competition. That's it. Don't let him.

https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html

There are multiple concerns:

1. The basic principals of Federation is "killed" as Threads will try and bait people on ONLY using their platform. For example that they wont even show any posts/comments from others but in reverse they spam other posts with their posts and comments.

2. There will be a huge increase of users like multiple million users. With it that type of users who want to share literally every opinion. The karen, twitter "Free Speech" type. It will bring much hate to the fediverse.

Personally the fediverses goal is to have smaller instances and not a big boy that wants everything.

And they would try and monetize and advertise in the fediverse.