Is kbin.social anti-corporation? Should it be? (kbin.social)

submitted 1 year ago by shepherd@kbin.social to c/kbinMeta@kbin.social

13 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I'm seeing discussions on other instances about how a "federated" corporate instance should be handled, i.e. Meta, or really any major company.

What would kbin.social's stance be towards federating/defederating with a Meta instance?

Or what should that stance be?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Kaldo@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

I've seen this article circulating and I think it's a really good cautionary tale. If meta arrives here in full force it's completely going to take over the fediverse, they are already splitting the community as it is.

https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html

Note that this is different subject from being anti-corporate. I don't think there's an issue if companies start booting their instances and creating communities for their games or content, whether its EA, Bioware, CDPR or something like pcgamer, LTT, gamersnexus, etc. They want the PR and visibility on a social network but their goal probably wouldn't be take over the AP, and could add some validity and get other bigger names to be active here. That is assuming we want growth at all.

[-] kudzu@mstdn.social 1 points 1 year ago

It's really helpful to see a previous example of something like this happening. I was aware of many instances blocking the potential Meta instance but didn't really get the reason why. Now it makes sense.

load more comments (6 replies)

this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2023

0 points (NaN% liked)

/kbin meta

2 readers

1 users here now

Magazine dedicated to discussions about the kbin itself. Provide feedback, ask questions, suggest improvements, and engage in conversations related to the platform organization, policies, features, and community dynamics. ---- * Roadmap 2023 * m/kbinDevlog * m/kbinDesign

founded 1 year ago