What does defederating from Meta's Threads.net actually accomplish? (lemmy.one)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by Kurt@lemmy.one to c/fediverse@lemmy.world

112 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Afaik, whenever an Activitypub instance has defederated from another it has always had to do with some combination of bad user behavior, poor moderation, and/or spam. Are the various instance admins who have decided to preemptively block threads.net simply convinced that these traits will be inevitable with it? Is it more of a symbolic move, because we all hate Meta? Or is the idea to just maintain a barrier (albeit a porous one) between us and the part of the Internet inhabited by our chuddy relatives?

(For my part, I'm working on setting up my own Lemmy and/or Pixelfed instance(s) and I do not currently intend to defederate.)

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

[-] Kichae@kbin.social 43 points 1 year ago

Anything that lands on Meta's servers is open for Meta's use, however they see fit. Providing free training data for their algorithms just isn't something everyone here is ok with.

Many of us are here consciously because we're anti-corporate exploitation, not merely because our previous hangout spot fucked around, and Meta is king shit of corporate exploitation, and we want nothing to do with anything that's helping them.

[-] farcaller@fstab.sh 3 points 1 year ago

Isn’t it subject to the same GDPR rules that the whole of fediverse pretends they don’t exist? All it takes is asking facebook what they have on you and unlike some “depersonalized” identifier you can ask for your data based on the activitypub id. It's actually much easier to go after a big corp with such a request as opposed to some random mastodon or lemmy instance.

[-] Gashole711@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

There's a reason Meta can't operate Threads in Europe. They don't abide by the GDPR.

[-] farcaller@fstab.sh 1 points 1 year ago

I’m pretty sure the parent company knows how to deal with GDPR between facebook, whatsapp, and instagram. Whatever issues they faced in EU (most probably the EU's Digital Markets Act) isn’t directly related to GDPR, because if it was for GDPR compliance alone I guarantee they'd be in the appstore by this evening.

[-] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Pretty sure

Meta ordered to suspend Facebook EU data flows as it’s hit with record €1.2BN privacy fine under GDPR

The EDPB found that Meta IE’s [Ireland’s] infringement is very serious since it concerns transfers that are systematic, repetitive and continuous.

[-] farcaller@fstab.sh 1 points 1 year ago

That's a great example! I am actually aware of this case. Mind that the article quotes:

Meta’s sanction is for breaching conditions set out in the pan-EU regulation governing transfers of personal data to so-called third countries (in this case the US) without ensuring adequate protections for people’s information.

And we discuss the GDPR in the context of the data requests retrieval in here. So you’re absolutely correct in that they suck about following it to the letter, but I don’t think this particular one applies to this discussion.