@SDF @sdfpubnix Please tell me that all #SDF instances across the Fediverse will be #defederating with #threads.net and any other instances created thereafter by any of the major data mining tech companies.

  • epg@social.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    @thomask as I wrote over there:

    Defederating from Threads is analogous to refusing to accept mail from or deliver mail to Gmail, is it not?

    As long as there’s no concern with Threads knocking SDF over due to outsized mass, I think defederating is a bad move.

    • Scroll Responsibly@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Would you want to federate with Reddit?

      Google hasn’t actively tried to shutdown its competing email providers… Meta has (tried to purchase or shut down its competitors on multiple occasions). Why do you think they aren’t trying to do that this time?

      • SirBenet@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Google (gmail) and Microsoft (hotmail/outlook) are both infamous for anticompetitive behaviour.

        I can’t know Meta’s internal strategy for sure, but I’d speculate that they see Twitter as the primary competitor to Threads by a significant margin.

        Fediverse integration, introducing fediverse concepts to a large number of people, seems more likely part of one-upping Twitter rather than an attempt to kill the fediverse.

        • Scroll Responsibly@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          So if Reddit or Twitter decided to join the fediverse… you would be ok with that?

          Social media isn’t something neutral like email, social media companies manipulate their users’ opinions and their feeds for profit. I just don’t believe we should just give away the digital commons again. If Threads was just about killing Twitter, Facebook wouldn’t be adding fediverse functionality to Threads in the first place.

    • jadero@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mostly agree, but I’ve seen elsewhere that the fediverse (or some corners of it) were set up with the explicit intent to be ad-free and privacy respecting.

      My opinion is that it all comes down to two things:

      1. Will Threads respect that intent?
      2. Given the difficulty of moderating content, can we handle the expected volume?

      The answers to those questions can guide the admins (and us, I guess) in the decision.

    • cfenollosa@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree with this interpretation too and it is an excellent simile.

      If sdf defederates from big instances I will accept their decision but I will find another server.

      • pfr@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Equally, if SDF does not defederate from evil instances then I’ll find another that will

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      One thing we could do, I guess, is block users from moving to Threads once that’s a feature that exists. Blocking it entirely feels a little pointless. We’re in no position to actually kill it.