1851
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by downpunxx@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] TGhost@lemmy.fmhy.ml 60 points 1 year ago
[-] Redtitwhore@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm very new here but already feel invested in it's goals and success. We don't need a ton of users or to beat Reddit, etc, we need to be independent and free. Having a slice of the internet not controlled by capitalism is worth fighting for.

I believe things like Threads.net and the Fediverse are fundamentally at odds with each other because the Fediverse is meant to be an alternative not a replacement. No one should be hoping Reddit and others fail because if they do and only the Fediverse was left i believe it would be doomed to become like them.

[-] WarpScanner@lemmy.fmhy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

I feel like avoiding a corporate trap for instant growth for the sake of protecting more sustainable long term growth is still in essence a focus on growth.

I agree with the decision to try and dodge this poison pill, but I disagree on the ideology that we shouldn't try and get as many people on board the fediverse as possible. I want federated social media to have revolutionary power, and you can't have power without leverage.

[-] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 year ago

Thanks for the article. Well worth reading.

[-] throws_lemy@lemmy.nz 3 points 1 year ago

Meta is also a threat to the privacy of fediverse users

Ross Schulman, senior fellow for decentralization at digital rights nonprofit the Electronic Frontier Foundation, notes that if Threads emerges as a massive player in the fediverse, there could be concerns about what he calls “social graph slurping." Meta will know who all of its users interact with and follow within Threads, and it will also be able to see who its users follow in the broader fediverse. And if Threads builds up anywhere near the reach of other Meta platforms, just this little slice of life would give the company a fairly expansive view of interactions beyond its borders.

https://www.wired.com/story/meta-threads-privacy-decentralization/

[-] TGhost@lemmy.fmhy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

i will clearly go on instances who are blockings theses craps.

[-] FightMilk@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

It’s actually entirely possible that the vast majority of the team there is pro-fediverse and Meta “wants” it to succeed. But the thing about corporations is they’re fluid entities and could turn anti-fediverse overnight for no reason other than it’s the best financial move now.

The only thing we have to ask ourselves is, at any point in the future will the best possible financial move for Meta be to begin sabotaging the fediverse? It almost seems like a certainty, doesn’t it?

[-] TGhost@lemmy.fmhy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

the team don't own the product. are they even on an union ^^ I say YES for second part.

this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2023
1851 points (96.9% liked)

Technology

60052 readers
3405 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS