0
()
submitted a long while ago by @ to c/@
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] LeZero@lemmy.world 581 points 11 months ago

To the people shitting on the idea of a default defederation with Meta, how about we deferedate not because it will affect us as posters but because they are evil pieces of shit?

[-] b3nsn0w@pricefield.org 220 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

yeah, the difference is pretty stark:

  • lemmy: we'll give you a way to dm anyone on site, but please don't use that, if you set up an app on this other open source service we're not affiliated with (which is basically an encrypted discord) we'll do our best to make it as seamless for you as possible. we'll keep warning you for your own privacy.
  • meta/facebook: aggressively keeps you on-platform for spying purposes; literally killed xmpp a decade ago and they'll fuckin do it again (if we let them)

They trust me. Dumb fucks.

- Mark Zuckerberg

(yes it sounds like satire but that's a real quote)

[-] nLuLukna@sh.itjust.works 38 points 11 months ago

The Lemmy DM is imo actually quite important. If I want to get in touch with someone about a post, nothing more. It is an easy option, and serves a purpose. It isn't imo meant to be used for anything else.

[-] b3nsn0w@pricefield.org 34 points 11 months ago

yep, it's important that we have this capability, but it's also nice that unlike other platforms that do their best to lock you in, lemmy actively pushes you toward a safer alternative

[-] pec@sh.itjust.works 6 points 11 months ago

What's the name of that safer alternative?

[-] b3nsn0w@pricefield.org 17 points 11 months ago

Matrix, which is pretty much an encrypted and open-source Discord clone (at least in the same fashion as Lemmy would be a Reddit clone). I personally use Element to interact with it and have a matrix.org account, but Matrix is just like the fediverse, you can choose any instance or client you want, or even host an instance yourself. In your Lemmy settings you can set up your Matrix user, right below your email address as of 0.18.1, and if you do, a new buttons saying "send secure message" will show up on your profile, next to "send message", which will redirect people trying to message you to Matrix.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] blue_zephyr@lemmy.world 33 points 11 months ago

I mean I agree with Zuck on that one.

[-] bluejay@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 11 months ago

Was it Facebook that killed xmpp or Google? Legitimately asking because I've always seen that blamed on Google.

[-] triarius@programming.dev 14 points 11 months ago

It was Google, they Embraced, Extended, and Extinguished it with Google Chat. Then they killed that themselves.

[-] triplenadir@lemmygrad.ml 11 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

correction: it was both! fedbook chat also supported xmpp at first, they never federated but you could at least use it with a jabber client. then when they had enough market share they killed it.

fun semi related fact is that whatsapp, at least a couple of years ago, was using modified ejabberd (ie an xmpp server) as the backend - so arguably they helped with EEE too.

[-] b3nsn0w@pricefield.org 8 points 11 months ago

google does seem to be the main culprit, but facebook still played a role as far as i'm aware. these two companies also colluded a lot so i wouldn't trust either of them with anything federated

[-] bluejay@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 11 months ago

Yeah they can both get fucked. Cheers

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Pelicanen@sopuli.xyz 4 points 11 months ago

literally killed xmpp a decade ago

This was Google/Alphabet.

[-] Steeve@lemmy.ca 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

How on earth did Meta kill XMPP, where is that even from lol. They didn't even have a standalone messaging app until 2011, which is after Google Talk dropped support for XMPP.

[-] bogdugg@sh.itjust.works 31 points 11 months ago

Some game-of-telephone misinformation originating from this article - though it has gone from Google killed it (which this article states), to it was a protocol that allowed Facebook and Google to communicate and then got killed, to Facebook killed it.

[-] Steeve@lemmy.ca 13 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I don't even agree that Google killed it, because it's simply a messaging protocol, it doesn't "die". Maybe you could try to argue that Google killed Jabber, but I used Jabber back in the early 00s, pretty much nobody else did lol, almost all IM communication was done over MSN Messenger. Google Talk brought XMPP "users" and they left when Google sunsetted Talk in favour of Hangouts. Facebook Messenger used XMPP for a time, so if anything they "revived" it (they didn't, it was never dead), but, like all the other messaging apps, they moved to their own proprietary version to add their own features.

This is what XMPP was actually designed for, the X literally means "eXtensible", whether it's extended open source or into proprietary versions.

I feel like there's a lot of anti-tech misinformation on Lemmy and it's great to be skeptical, but honestly I think we waste a ton of time being easily ragebait'd into the wrong shit.

[-] ChrisLicht@lemm.ee 8 points 11 months ago
[-] 01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 6 points 11 months ago

Video killed the radio star!

[-] Steeve@lemmy.ca 4 points 11 months ago
[-] b3nsn0w@pricefield.org 8 points 11 months ago

my understanding was that while google is the main culprit, facebook and google both played a big part in killing it. but since we're discussing meta/facebook here, and they're not blameless, i focused on that.

but yeah, fuck google too.

load more comments (11 replies)
[-] siouxsy@lemm.ee 8 points 11 months ago

Yeah Google is more to blame for that. When they defedarated it was pretty much the end of XMPP. From what I remember, Facebook used the protocol but never opened their service for federation.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Lemmylefty@lemmy.world 56 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

And even if what I do is relatively tame, I want others to be protected from the wolf at the door.

[-] whofearsthenight@lemmy.world 34 points 11 months ago

This. I don't need to win, I just want Meta to lose.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] WindyRebel@lemmy.world 26 points 11 months ago

Are you saying that the individuals who run these servers and instances aren’t subject to the same laws? I read the article, and Facebook complied with a court order.

You don’t think anyone running Lemmy would do the same without access to lawyers and capital like Facebook has?

[-] LeZero@lemmy.world 48 points 11 months ago

Do you have to run your lemmy instance in the US?

Maybe do it in a less backward place

[-] WindyRebel@lemmy.world 20 points 11 months ago

Not disagreeing with you there.

[-] lazynooblet@lazysoci.al 19 points 11 months ago

Every interaction on Lemmy is copied to all other federated instances. There are instances all over the world with a copy of yours and my comment. They can track and use those comments for any purpose. Its both a blessing and a curse of an open federated structure.

[-] b3nsn0w@pricefield.org 15 points 11 months ago

they can also scrape them. that's not really the point.

people can dm on lemmy, and only the two instances that host the people on either end of the dm (which may even be the same instance) store that dm. that instance may actually receive a subpoena. but all of this is heavily discouraged by the lemmy interface itself, instead prompting people to set up a matrix account instead, and matrix chats are end-to-end encrypted.

[-] peril33@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago

Its a social platfrom. Dont use it for personal communications.

[-] Brownboy13@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

And how can we be sure that all the instances federated with any instance we participate on aren't run by law enforcement themselves? I'd be surprised if there aren't running instances by every major investigative agency themselves.

[-] WheeGeetheCat@sh.itjust.works 12 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

This is why everyone should take steps to protect their privacy. You don't have to go 0-100 overnight. Just audit yourself and do a few things now. Keep those habits up. Then audit and add a few more things, repeat.

I need to do this myself, I've been slipping

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 11 months ago

Lemmy promotes using Matrix, which is a separate service, so instance admins don't need to be in the business of hosting private conversations.

Matrix is end-to-end encrypted so even the admins of your Matrix server could not provide your chats to law enforcement.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Arbiter@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Complying with the law is less of an issue than keeping that data accessible in the first place.

[-] BossDj@lemm.ee 15 points 11 months ago

But also fuck these laws and the people passing them and the people voting for the people passing them. They're the real evil.

We have to always assume rich corporations are going to do whatever serves their best interest. It's nature. Like a mantis is gonna bite off her mate's head when they're done mating. It's up to governing factors to keep them in check. On that note, +1 to defederate. They will cannibalize or however abuse Lemmy if it will make them a penny.

[-] burak@lemmy.ml 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I think we’re realizing more and more any corporate-operated platform is luring us in to sell to us and sell us.

[-] FoxyZac64@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago

Ya. That's fucked. Just ruin someone's life like that. Holy fuck.

[-] 2MnyDcksOnThDncFlr@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

I totally agree with your sentiment... However they don't have a choice. They are legally obligated to turn that information over if they are served a warrant. Doing anything less is obstruction at the very least and they could be shut down and put into receivership.

The fault here is with the two individuals trusting a corporation to keep data private and to put the individuals interests ahead of the corporation. Neither is a realistic expectation.

[-] triplenadir@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 11 months ago

they could have made their shitty DM system end-to-end encrypt messages by default, instead of burying that feature[0] in chat settings

or, they could have used their MASSIVE wealth and lobbying power to directly fight the warrant in court (if there even was one, they have a long history of just requiring a form ostensibly signed by any cop to turn over private data)

or they could have just lied and said they couldn't find the data

I don't disagree that people shouldn't trust Facebook but saying "they don't have a choice" is absurd

[0] https://www.facebook.com/help/messenger-app/786613221989782

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] DrQuint@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago

I vote to write this reasoning at the very top, on the sticked topics when it happens. Like, literally just write "Because Facebook is evil" and don't elaborate.

Plus, if someone shows up being a concern troll on the point, they will laser focus on it, taking the bait, we can all just block the person, a world improved.

[-] Telodzrum@lemmy.ml 3 points 11 months ago

Any Lemmy instance would have given over the same information in this case. Meta was complying with a valid, legal search warrant.

[-] PorkrollPosadist@lemmy.ml 9 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

If some fuckstick from Nebraska asked me to snitch on my users for something which isn't a crime in my state, I would simply tell them to fuck themselves, go ahead, and try to have me extradited. If my instance were bordering on a trillion dollars market cap, I'd hire a fucking lawyer.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
this post was submitted on 01 Jan 0001
0 points (NaN% liked)

0 readers
0 users here now

founded a long while ago