346
Threads' New Terms and Conditions Affects the Fediverse
(wedistribute.org)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2023
346 points (92.2% liked)
Fediverse
17854 readers
2 users here now
A community dedicated to fediverse news and discussion.
Fediverse is a portmanteau of "federation" and "universe".
Getting started on Fediverse;
- What is the fediverse?
- Fediverse Platforms
- How to run your own community
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Yes, but not every server is owned by Meta.
Ok, so we're back to defederation not because of any existing tangible evidence in this circumstance, but "because it's Meta". It's fine if that's your opinion and all, but let's stop spreading misinformation on the dangers of collecting the data required by anyone for federation.
And if you're here and pretending to care about data privacy at least try to do the bare minimum in understanding how the Fediverse works.
Hi, I agree that there needs to be discussion.
But let’s be honest here. If meta made a lemmy/mastodon instance we would probably defederate them as well since every bit of data is for their financial gain and nothing else.
I don’t see how the worlds master manipulator and anti trust poster child is even remotely worth discussing about. We have established time and time again that „meta bad“. Why would we now not just accept the fact?
I think there is a bit of hysteria about Threads/Meta and some people are trying to push back. There are plenty of people in this thread that don't fully understand federation and are knee-jerk reacting because it's Meta.
However, I totally agree with the sentiment being expressed, which is to keep Meta and large corporations as far away from Lemmy as possible. This is a community-run space that is a haven from the corporate internet, and indeed capitalist society in general. Protecting this space should be our highest priority.
I feel that some of our more technical users are losing the forest for the trees in this discussion. Believe it or not, some Lemmings don't come from a 30 year tech background and don't fully understand how the platform, or indeed the internet as a whole, actually functions.
This group of people, which includes me, are acting rationally by opposing any interaction with Meta on grounds of principle. We don't know exactly what we are scared of, but we do know if there is any vulnerability or weakness that Meta is trying to exploit, they already know their plan and we won't know until it's too late. Meta is a terrifying behemoth just waiting for a chance to consume Lemmy. I would argue that a little bit of hysteria is justified in this case.
Edit: just to clarify, this is more of a response to the parent comment, I think we are in agreement. I didn't want to start another reply thread so I figured I would build off your point.
Thanks for pointing that out. I‘m sort of between the two. Doing IT more or less professionally for 20+ yrs but I can’t tell you the definitive workings of the fediverse either. I understand the principles and I like them.
Have a good one. :)
Like I said, that's a fine opinion to hold. What isn't fine is the constant spinning of facts and narratives to suit a personal bias, regardless of how I feel about that bias.
I‘m not sure I follow. Did I spin facts?
Not that I'm aware of? Not saying you personally did, I'm discussing the context. This post and the top level comments.
Ok. That wasn’t clear to me. Thanks for elaborating.
Oh, we're defederating exactly because of tangible evidence that Meta steals every information it can about you. I personally stripped Meta almost entirely out of my life, I definitely don't want them crawling back just because someone else wants to use Threads.
Oh, I do. I'm my own instance admin, I work as a senior architect and grasped the concept of Fediverse quite fast.
If you're going to quote me I'd appreciate if you didn't cut out relevant parts of it to fit your argument.
The "you" in my comment was a generalized "you", not you specifically.
Sure, edited the comment to include it, it doesn't change my argument at all.
Hard to distinguish.
It's not tangible evidence, it's an extrapolation based on Meta's previous actions. I mean, it's still pretty convincing.
Although I do wonder if Meta would be able to get away with it legally. That might not stop Meta though.