01000001 01110010 01100101 00100000 01111001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01110011 01110101 01110010 01100101 00111111 00100000

Fwiw: other than insults and a mod’s implied threat… The conversation looked like it had potential and that both of you were making relevanct, fact-based points.

Issue was that there was a low key combativeness throughout and I’m not sure why that was necessary. I see that a lot online, but I think I see it more here than anywhere else.

I’ve wondered if it’s just easy to feel like a big fish in this medium sized pond and then embarrass ourselves when we meet a fish of approximately equal size.

Having said all the above. I slip into combative too. Almost always have regrets later, but it’s super easy to do.

I see this going only a few directions:

• Threads tries and fails
• Threads succeeds, flexes, annexes
• Equilibrium, and Mastodon/Lemmy become the social network APIs that connect across (like I wish we’d had when G+ was a thing)

Meta will be okay making money off lemmy indirectly for a while. Then, if they grow, they’ll want more than a toehold.

When it’s Facebook, trust that greed and power are the goals.

They don’t take risks.

Quibble: Meta took a huge write off because their metaverse didn’t get the reception they hoped.

I think they take risks, just calculated ones. And sometimes… A founders ambition.

deleted by creator

It’s a network of social media, all using the same protocols, and each tends to have some focus: Canada, Australia, art, communism, and large numbers of members, for example.

I didn’t find federated social media to he hard to understand after the first hour or so. Is that weird?