148
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/div0@lemmy.dbzer0.com

I asked and enough of you answered that allowing to federate with threads.net even for the lolz would be considered too risky for y'all.

So I've gone ahead and added threads.net to our blocklist.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] sacredbirdman@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago

Yeah, I still remember early days of building something for the internet and you know what held back development easily by years: Internet Explorer. Big corporations even back then were playing that same shitty game of EEE, trying to lock people down and not caring at all about standards. Standards are why we have an internet at all.

[-] UserDoesNotExist@sh.itjust.works -3 points 1 year ago

And defederating threads would not be considered „locking down“?

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

It's not. It's a choice that instances make, not a change to the protocol. You can always change your instance or host your own and as long as Threads conforms to the activitypub protocol you can interact with it. Locking down cannot happen as long as majority of participants adhere to an open protocol. It is what happens when a major player makes proprietary changes to how interaction works. Please study how EEE works, there are numerous examples in the past. Defederation is not that.

[-] UserDoesNotExist@sh.itjust.works -3 points 1 year ago

Well I believe we will come to no agreement then. To my understanding, locking down is both, proprietary software and the decision to defederate. Because both have the same result.

this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2023
148 points (100.0% liked)

/0

1546 readers
1 users here now

Meta community. Discuss about this lemmy instance or lemmy in general.

Service Uptime view

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS