Shouldn’t exist? Why? Ofcourse it exists and it’s not even a problem. People just are different and have different interests. It’s up to the individual to choose what they want to pay attention to and what not.
I have to guess you are too young to know the lengthy and detailed history of the anti-consumer and anti-privacy activities of Facebook/Meta over the past decades. (And if you aren’t, you haven’t been paying attention)
There is no corporate entity in the tech space that I can think of that has so thoroughly proven time and time again that they will bend or break every rule if it makes more dollars for them. (I say this despite the existence of Microsoft.) Their users are literally nothing but statistics and a data/income stream for them. It’s not (mostly) about who uses Threads, it’s about Meta. If the fediverse can be fucked over and enshittified (and it most certainly can), Meta will be the one to figure out how, and do it.
There is NO upside to federation with Threads. Zero. The only entity it benefits is Meta.
There’s a reason you can subscribe to commmunities you’re interested in and block the ones you’re not. It’s so that you can curate your feed to reflect your personal interests which vary between individuals.
When it comes to what you’re talking about; you’re free to block threads.net instance yourself or you can choose an instance that does it for you. They’re getting access to your your lemmy content either way.
They’re getting access to your your lemmy content either way.
That’s not an argument for cooperating with them.
That’s not at all what I’m talking about.
But it’s what matters, and it is what the person you originally replied to was talking about. (Edit- it’s not what they were talking about, I thought you’d replied to a different comment. The rest of my point stands.)
Whether I personally see Threads stuff does not relate to whether Meta can and will create an inflection point that distorts the fediverse into something different than it is today. Nothing in their history points in any direction OTHER than - we’ll all be making another exodus at some point, to get away from them and companies like them.
Edit: I say again - literally no upside to federating with Threads for anyone except Meta.
You’re free to not federate with them but due to the open nature of the fediverse there’s nothing you can do to stop them from federating with you. What ever you post they have access to.
Still. This has nothing to do with what I was talking about.
There is NO upside to federation with Threads. Zero.
That’s a bit of an exaggeration. I don’t think it will affect Lemmy at all, since it’s a different type of posts. But in terms of Mastodon, it means a whole lot more content for Mastodon users, and a whole lot more people to follow. And also means that people can move to Mastodon while still having the audience that Threads provides.
Of course if you think that the downsides are worse than the upsides, then that doesn’t really matter. But don’t say there are NO upsides.
That’s a great solution to a problem that shouldn’t exist.
Shouldn’t exist? Why? Ofcourse it exists and it’s not even a problem. People just are different and have different interests. It’s up to the individual to choose what they want to pay attention to and what not.
I have to guess you are too young to know the lengthy and detailed history of the anti-consumer and anti-privacy activities of Facebook/Meta over the past decades. (And if you aren’t, you haven’t been paying attention)
There is no corporate entity in the tech space that I can think of that has so thoroughly proven time and time again that they will bend or break every rule if it makes more dollars for them. (I say this despite the existence of Microsoft.) Their users are literally nothing but statistics and a data/income stream for them. It’s not (mostly) about who uses Threads, it’s about Meta. If the fediverse can be fucked over and enshittified (and it most certainly can), Meta will be the one to figure out how, and do it.
There is NO upside to federation with Threads. Zero. The only entity it benefits is Meta.
That’s not at all what I’m talking about.
There’s a reason you can subscribe to commmunities you’re interested in and block the ones you’re not. It’s so that you can curate your feed to reflect your personal interests which vary between individuals.
When it comes to what you’re talking about; you’re free to block threads.net instance yourself or you can choose an instance that does it for you. They’re getting access to your your lemmy content either way.
Already done.
That’s not an argument for cooperating with them.
But it’s what matters, and it is what the person you originally replied to was talking about. (Edit- it’s not what they were talking about, I thought you’d replied to a different comment. The rest of my point stands.)
Whether I personally see Threads stuff does not relate to whether Meta can and will create an inflection point that distorts the fediverse into something different than it is today. Nothing in their history points in any direction OTHER than - we’ll all be making another exodus at some point, to get away from them and companies like them.
Edit: I say again - literally no upside to federating with Threads for anyone except Meta.
You’re free to not federate with them but due to the open nature of the fediverse there’s nothing you can do to stop them from federating with you. What ever you post they have access to.
Still. This has nothing to do with what I was talking about.
That’s a bit of an exaggeration. I don’t think it will affect Lemmy at all, since it’s a different type of posts. But in terms of Mastodon, it means a whole lot more content for Mastodon users, and a whole lot more people to follow. And also means that people can move to Mastodon while still having the audience that Threads provides.
Of course if you think that the downsides are worse than the upsides, then that doesn’t really matter. But don’t say there are NO upsides.