Instances in the free fediverses should consider "transitive defederation" from instances that federate with Meta (privacy.thenexus.today)

submitted 10 months ago by thenexusofprivacy@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/fediverse@lemmy.world

142 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/7477620

Transitive defederation -- defederating from instances that federate with Threads as well as defederating from Threads -- isn't likely to be an all-or-nothing thing in the free fediverses. Tradeoffs are different for different people and instances. This is one of the strengths of the fediverse, so however much transitive defederation there winds up being, I see it as overall as a positive thing -- although also messy and complicated.

The recommendation here is for instances to consider #TransitiveDefederation: discuss, and decide what to do. I've also got some thoughts on how to have the discussion -- and the strategic aspects.

(Part 7 of Strategies for the free fediverses )

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

[-] balancedchaos@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

As long as Meta can't infect the rest of the fediverse, or track or monetize it...fine. I just never, ever want Meta shit on my timeline.

[-] intensely_human@lemm.ee 15 points 10 months ago

How would Meta “infect” anything? Do you really think Meta is producing self-replicating things that jump from person to person?

[-] Chozo@kbin.social 5 points 10 months ago

What sort of "Meta shit" would you possibly expect to appear on your timeline?

[-] balancedchaos@lemmy.world -2 points 10 months ago

Sort by "all," and the popular instances show up.

I wouldn't like to see FB and Threads dominate that with the bleating of the sheep they've cultivated.

[-] Chozo@kbin.social 7 points 10 months ago

Okay, but what sort of material would you expect to actually see on your timeline in this scenario?

[-] intensely_human@lemm.ee 3 points 10 months ago

They can’t answer this. All they do is downvote you. It means you found the end of their philosophy.

For some people, their philosophy ends where a question about specifics begins.

[-] balancedchaos@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago

Wow. Really reaching there, huh?

What Meta shit wouldn't I like to see? A general watering down of the comment quality. Trolling. Nonsense. What has happened to every somewhat technical technology the second the normies cry "gatekeeping" and force their way in with a dumb fucking look on their face and without an original idea in their heads.

That Meta shit is what I'd like to avoid. Just because one doesn't have opportunity to respond doesn't mean there isn't a response.

[-] sour@kbin.social -3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

””””influencers””””

[-] Chozo@kbin.social 5 points 10 months ago

Pretty sure they're on TikTok, and not Threads.

[-] sour@kbin.social -4 points 10 months ago

._.

[-] FaceDeer@kbin.social 3 points 10 months ago

So don't subscribe to Meta-hosted communities?

Lots of Fediverse instances let you block whole instances, too, so you could personally block them. Problem solved.

[-] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works 4 points 10 months ago

I've learned that there's a huge number of people on lemmy who prefer government regulation to self control. I had an argument with a guy the other day who wants $12 lattes banned instead of simply not buying them. Apparently making something available is the same as putting a gun to your head and forcing you to buy it.

[-] sour@kbin.social -2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

does self control prevent triangle shirtwaist fire

[-] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works 4 points 10 months ago

No, that is an example of an appropriate problem to solve with regulation. "If something I exists I must buy it and that is the vendor's fault" is not.

[-] sour@kbin.social 1 points 10 months ago

if regular latte is 12 dollars is economy problem

[-] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works 3 points 10 months ago

McDonald's has a latte for $1 and Dunkin donuts has one for $2.65. It's not an economy problem. It's probably a pretty good latte. I dunno, never tried it, $12 is too much for sugar coffee.