7
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by pfr@social.sdf.org to c/sdfpubnix@lemmy.sdf.org

@SDF @sdfpubnix Please tell me that all #SDF instances across the Fediverse will be #defederating with #threads.net and any other instances created thereafter by any of the major data mining tech companies.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] thomask@lemmy.sdf.org 11 points 1 year ago
[-] epg@social.sdf.org 16 points 1 year ago

@thomask as I wrote over there:

Defederating from Threads is analogous to refusing to accept mail from or deliver mail to Gmail, is it not?

As long as there’s no concern with Threads knocking SDF over due to outsized mass, I think defederating is a bad move.

Would you want to federate with Reddit?

Google hasn’t actively tried to shutdown its competing email providers… Meta has (tried to purchase or shut down its competitors on multiple occasions). Why do you think they aren’t trying to do that this time?

[-] SirBenet@lemmy.sdf.org -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Google (gmail) and Microsoft (hotmail/outlook) are both infamous for anticompetitive behaviour.

I can't know Meta's internal strategy for sure, but I'd speculate that they see Twitter as the primary competitor to Threads by a significant margin.

Fediverse integration, introducing fediverse concepts to a large number of people, seems more likely part of one-upping Twitter rather than an attempt to kill the fediverse.

[-] scroll_responsibly@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

So if Reddit or Twitter decided to join the fediverse… you would be ok with that?

Social media isn’t something neutral like email, social media companies manipulate their users’ opinions and their feeds for profit. I just don’t believe we should just give away the digital commons again. If Threads was just about killing Twitter, Facebook wouldn’t be adding fediverse functionality to Threads in the first place.

[-] pfr@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago

What concerns me is how much information is available to all instance admins.

this comment in particular made me think.

[-] user224@lemmy.sdf.org -1 points 1 year ago

Me, yes. It could make more content available, which is like the main reason why people don't switch.

[-] jadero@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 year ago

I mostly agree, but I've seen elsewhere that the fediverse (or some corners of it) were set up with the explicit intent to be ad-free and privacy respecting.

My opinion is that it all comes down to two things:

  1. Will Threads respect that intent?
  2. Given the difficulty of moderating content, can we handle the expected volume?

The answers to those questions can guide the admins (and us, I guess) in the decision.

[-] cfenollosa@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago

I agree with this interpretation too and it is an excellent simile.

If sdf defederates from big instances I will accept their decision but I will find another server.

[-] pfr@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago

Equally, if SDF does not defederate from evil instances then I'll find another that will

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 0 points 1 year ago

One thing we could do, I guess, is block users from moving to Threads once that's a feature that exists. Blocking it entirely feels a little pointless. We're in no position to actually kill it.

this post was submitted on 08 Jul 2023
7 points (61.3% liked)

sdfpubnix

1298 readers
1 users here now

Fans of SDF

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS