I would like to know if I can feel safe here, or if I should pack it up and start looking elsewhere sooner rather than later.

If the kbin staff have already made there intentions clear, please let me know.

  • duringoverflow@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    i’m sorry but you’re naive.

    If I want to post something and I want people to see it and react to it, I will post it to the side with more people.

    do you know how FB or instagram work? Do you think that when you post, your post reaches your whole audience? I believe you know how they work but for some reason you chose to ignore now.

    My argument is that the fedipact, if executed as desired by the people running it, will defederate from Meta and anywhere that federates with Meta.
    So now you have 2 fediverses, completely separated from one another.

    So, you’ve read the history of XMPP. Did you understand what google practically did? Simply put, meta will create new features on top of activity pub. Open source activity pub developers will be in a constant race to adapt their own projects in a way that will be compatible with meta’s project. They will have no voice but to follow whatever meta decides. Users will start getting fed up that their open source instance is not behaving as well as their friend’s meta instance. People will jump project and/or when users are polarised, meta will decide that they had enough with activity pub. It doesn’t cover their needs and they move to another completely closed project. Users again are forces to choose side and the open source community is just left with the project which they adapted in favour of meta, but now meta is gone because they were never in the same boat actually.

    Staying away from meta is a decision in the basis of protecting the whole project. It is not because people don’t want to be close to the users of meta. It is because meta is not here to promote the federated networks. It is here to make profit of it and they may even destroy it if they believe that this is the way to make profit. Siding with them is naive and will never bring value in the network itself.

    • asjmcguire@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      None of that addresses the objection that has been raised though.

      If instances want to defederate from meta that is perfectly fine, the Fediverse is supposed to be about choice.
      Instances should not however be able to dictate what OTHER people on other instances are able to do.

      By doing so - that part of the fediverse is behaving in exactly the same way that they fear that meta will behave eventually.

      • duringoverflow@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I don’t get it. Nobody dictated anyone. People want absolutely none relation with meta and they want to be on a different network than meta. By federating with instances that federate with meta, everyone ends up in the same federated network while some pretend that they don’t see each other. Meta is not here for the same values they are. Meta is not here for the values of the fediverse. Ostracizing meta is the only healthy solution if we agree that they have ulterior motives.

        By doing so - that part of the fediverse is behaving in exactly the same way that they fear that meta will behave eventually.

        by not doing so, is like accepting meta as friend while at the same time you’re waiting for the moment they’ll stab you. Fediverse and activity pub have absolutely nothing to gain by allowing this.

        @asjmcguire

        • asjmcguire@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Right… so - the long and short of it is -

          A company (any company) decides to integrate with ActivityPub, and the entire fediverse has a toys out of the pram moment every time that happens, gradually closing off into smaller and smaller federated circles, that stop federating with the rest of the fediverse.

          A reminder, Tumblr are supposed to be adding ActivityPub.
          Wordpress has.
          Discourse I believe now has.

          So who exactly is it that gets to decide which companies are and are not allowed to be part of the Fediverse?

          It’s all very very much like a dictatorship, whether you want to accept it or not - that’s exactly how it is being operated.

          • be_excellent_to_each_other@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Absolute strawman from the very first paragraph. Some people might complain about any company, but this uproar is specifically about facebook. Let’s not pretend they are just any other company. They are among a short list of companies who have demonstrated just how awful a big tech company can be if allowd.

            They have at no time in their history demonstrated any capability to be anything other than an example of all the worst things that Stallman or any of the OG greybeards would ever have warned us about. They are corporate greed exemplified, nearly to the point of parody.

          • duringoverflow@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            @asjmcguire

            I struggle to continue conversations when the argument is “if you’re doing X to Y you are also Y”. No, if you want to ostracise the biggest greediest corporation that we all know are here for different reasons than the reasons that the fediverse was created, no, you’re not a dictator. You are just trying to protect your own values.

            Same as when you don’t allow hate speech, you’re not a fascist who oPposEs tO fReE SpEeCh

            Using words with very clear, historically set meaning, to describe the exact opposite thing is a very weird path to take.

          • So who exactly is it that gets to decide which companies are and are not allowed to be part of the Fediverse?

            It’s all very very much like a dictatorship, whether you want to accept it or not - that’s exactly how it is being operated.

            Sorry I missed this in my prior reply and can no longer edit it.

            It’s not a dictatorship beyond any one instance, which is the entire point. You don’t like that some large percentage of instances have said “no thank you” to Meta? Then you move to an instance that is happy to be embraced by them.

            • asjmcguire@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              For christ sake I don’t understand why people aren’t getting it. YES it is a dictatorship because it is not about any one instance - if it was just instances saying “I don’t want to federate with Meta” and that was it - I wouldn’t have a problem, that is a perfectly acceptable thing to do. But that’s not what this is - this is instances saying “I don’t want to talk to Meta, and if you want to continue talking to me, then YOU are not allowed to talk to Meta either” - explain to me HOW that is not being a dictatorship?

    • EnglishMobster@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      do you know how FB or instagram work? Do you think that when you post, your post reaches your whole audience?

      Of course not. But it doesn’t on Mastodon either. Or Kbin. Or even Lemmy.

      If someone is on vacation when I make my post on Mastodon, there is a good chance they will never see it. The post isn’t going to be recommended to them - the feed is chronological. They would have to specifically search me out and scroll way back to see my posts.

      If my post doesn’t make it to “Hot” on Kbin or Lemmy, by default it dies. The only ones who will see it are those sorting by “New”. That’s a fraction of the complete audience. That’s just how algorithms work.

      Facebook and Twitter have their own recommendation algorithm of some kind. Threads does too, from what I’ve seen of it. While I wouldn’t expect my stuff to go viral, frankly my friends are more likely to care and react to a post I make there. I don’t use Facebook anymore, but I had plenty of interactions when I did use it. You will never reach your entire audience unless your entire audience reaches out for you - but on average the people I know are more likely to care about me than some strangers on my Mastodon instance. So I’d rather post where they can see it.

      So, you’ve read the history of XMPP. Did you understand what google practically did?

      Yes, that was… like, my entire point. Everything you just described will happen with or without the fedipact. If Meta has plans to go through with EEE, they will do it no matter what. Even if everyone defederated from them, they’d still build on ActivityPub in weird ways and break the protocol over time.

      But we know that not everywhere will defederate with them. So what will happen is you’re going to have a splinter group defederated anywhere that federates with Meta (or federates with somewhere that federates with Meta) and you’re going to have… well, everyone else.

      People are going to leave and go to the side that federates with Meta, because that’s where the network effect is strongest. Again, I don’t care that someone on my Mastodon instance got married. I mean, congratulations, I guess… but if my childhood best friend is getting married, I’m more invested. I don’t want to use Meta’s stuff if I have another option; after all, I did quit Instagram and Facebook cold turkey. But I would jump at the ability to have those moments while still keeping Zuck off my computer.

      So, like I said, this is going to lead to 2 fediverses. One that federates with Meta, and one that doesn’t. And “normal” non-techie people are going to want to go to where they get the most eyeballs on their stuff - that means somewhere that federates with Meta.

      Meta could still start extending and extinguishing. But they could do that anyway. That is a completely separate subject from the fedipact as designed. I agree that it’s a problem, but the fedipact being executed will only speed up the process, bisecting the entire project and turning it back into a niche thing for nerds. You know, like XMPP or IRC.

      Staying away from meta is a decision in the basis of protecting the whole project.

      Staying away from Meta literally has zero impact on what Meta does. Meta will do whatever.

      The choice is if Mastodon tries to adapt to be compatible or not. Breaking ActivityPub for compatibility with Meta is a losing proposition, and one that we shouldn’t even start. But that’s the fight we should be having; holding firm if/when Meta stops holding to the standard.

      The fedipact is self-defeating and won’t stop Meta from being Meta. The only thing the fedipact will do is ruin the fediverse writ large. The true way to preventing an XMPP situation is by having maintainers hold firm and act just as they did before Meta joined; no feature creep, no goalpost moving. Break EEE at “extend”, not “embrace”.

      • duringoverflow@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        @EnglishMobster

        If Meta has plans to go through with EEE, they will do it no matter what. Even if everyone defederated from them, they’d still build on ActivityPub in weird ways and break the protocol over time.

        if no one is federated with them, then open source projects don’t care if they break activity pub because nobody will be in a race to adapt in order not to break the federation. They will live happily in their own custom fediverse without affecting the community. I don’t get why you struggle to understand this concept. I think it is because of

        But we know that not everywhere will defederate with them. So what will happen is you’re going to have a splinter group defederated anywhere that federates with Meta (or federates with somewhere that federates with Meta) and you’re going to have… well, everyone else.

        where you clearly struggle to understand that the one who is causing the issue here are the ones that opt to follow meta’s path. The ones that will try to adapt. Not the ones that want no connection with the big corp. Instead of realising that meta has no good intentions, you side with them saying “it is what it is” and you just want to wait patiently till they actively start causing issues.

        Then again, I think we’re having the conversation in a wrong basis. Your biggest argument is that you want to be in the same platform as your friends. Yes, if for you the reason of existence of the federated network is to enable you reaching your friends who don’t want to leave from their corporate networks, yes, then federation with meta is necessary. However the idea behind such network is not only to provide another UI to join a corporate network. Its much more than that.

        I know I haven’t replied/addressed all your points, most probably I’ll come back later.