Because they increase usage of the apps. People just doom scroll and keep playing.
It’s a horrible thing IMO
Because they increase usage of the apps. People just doom scroll and keep playing.
It’s a horrible thing IMO
I agree with this. We should leave the door open to Threads users that may not know the Fediverse.
We can always de-federate later if Threads misbehaves.
I wonder what happens if somebody recycles a domain that was previously used for another instance… I feel like everything is going to break.
It’s possible to backup your data, but you have to do it beforehand. There’s no chance to save your data once the server goes down.
It could be millions only if hundreds of Mastodon/Lemmy users start following hundreds of different Threads users.
Which I don’t think it will be the case, since it seems like Threads federation is going to be opt-in by their users.
If 50 Mastodon users start following 100 Threads users, the impact will be negligible, since Threads will only push messages by those 100 users.
The EU also has an official Mastodon instance:
In some ways, I trust my data more with a highly scrutinized company such as Meta than a random weirdo spinning up his instance with a home server in his cabinet.
Let’s federate with Threads. Let’s not jump to conclusions beforehand.
I want to give them the benefit of the doubt and see how they behave. We can always defederate later.
Federation can also be reverted at any times if they misbehave. Why should we block them in advance?
In other words, Threads could help spreading the ActivityPub protocol more, not the other way around
I don’t want to use Meta’s apps, because they’re a privacy nightmare. Full of trackers
Why not? I want to keep up to date with their announcements and products. Famous people could be writers, journalists, whatever.
Following famous people and companies is what 99% of users of “normal” social media do.
Not only decentralization is not a feature – it’s a burden. “Normal” users (read: non nerds like 99% of us here) couldn’t care less about which server they should sign up to.
An old style forum service with a modern twist, made by one of the founders of Stack Overflow
Federation on Threads will be opt-in, you’ll be able to see posts only from people who actively decided to be available on the Fediverse. So it’s not going to be a 100 to 1 situation.
Threads said that they’re going to be opt-in. Each user will have to actively enable federation, so all this scary news seem a bit pointless to me.
They do not care for growth or anything else. They’re just implementing ActivityPub to look like “the good guys” compared to Musk, and also probably to try and look nice in front of the European Union. “See? We’re implementing open protocols, we’re not a gatekeeper anymore!”
So… we would be back to exactly how we are now?
I agree, I don’t want a blanket ban on Threads. I know Meta is a horrible company, but we shouldn’t decide in advance.
Honestly, I’d be very happy to be able to follow people on Threads through my privacy-respecting Mastodon/Lemmy app. Because, let’s be serious: we’re just a bunch of nerds here. If I want to follow famous people or companies, I’m going to find them on Meta’s platforms, not here.
ActivityPub lets me follow those accounts without using Meta’s apps, which are famously riddled with ads, trackers and whatnot.
You’re partially right, but it would be better if users were evenly spread on many instances.
Imagine if one instance becomes so big and then they de-federate. For normal users, nothing would change, but then we would have created the new R*ddit