Cue another round of 'Meta is bad, therefore fediverse admins shouldn't allow anyone on their servers to talk to anyone on Meta's server'. As usual, all the wailing and gnashing of teeth;

https://cyberpunk.lol/@FediPact/112871261753041389

... totally misses the point. Nobody here is defending Meta. Literally *nobody*.

I'm for federation with Meta's server because it helps people leave it. Simple as that.

(1/2)

It's starting to feel like the case is coming to a close:

EEE is a bad argument for why we should be afraid of Meta and Threads. Plenty of other arguments for why we should be afraid of them, but EEE ain't it.

Any last objections?

Interview by @mike with @Gargron.

So according to Eugen, he's been using XMPP during a time when people let their desktop PCs run all the time, which is ideal for XMPP's requirement to maintain an active connection from sender to recipient in order to actually deliver messages.

But when the world transitioned from desktop PCs to mobile phones, XMPP's requirement to stay always on was just not practical, and the world moved on from XMPP and onto other platforms.

The only way people used XMPP was through Facebook and Google Talk, but the mainstream really didn't have a strong appreciation for XMPP.

According to Eugen, Email is still going strong because everyone knows how to work with it

Effectively, embracing, extending, extinguishing is just not a thing for email yet.

https://flipboard.video/w/cTBu4HusskGTuPBahqm6WY

Reddit thread in response to the list of servers who block or plan to block Threads https://www.reddit.com/r/Mastodon/s/6E0O1pHTHz

I have previously expressed how much I am against the EEE argument, but considering that there is this linked post from someone who actually has experience with working at a company that does engage in EEE, I guess I should check my opinions about EEE at the door, shut up, and hear out the concerns from people.
https://mas.to/@andthisismrspeacock/111588768178247161

@krysanify@vivaldi.net

On a technical level, being able to leave is ideal.

I'm just calling out the drama behind the motivation of defederating Threads.

Go ahead, defederate them. Valid reasons being "I don't like Meta", or "I don't like Zuck." I can respect those reasoning.

But I can't respect the speculative reasoning that federating with them will empower Meta to "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" (EEE)

People will leave to the bigger instance, if it means having their friends in the same place.

Federating is great way to have "friends in the same place". Defederating Threads will force people to move to instances that either Federates with Threads, or just have them flat out leave the rest of the Fediverse to join and stay on Threads.

In the latter case, the network dies off, and all efforts by Meta to have Threads federate is just not worth it if they already have a large userbase and MAU. No need for EEE; the Fediverse is digging its own grave.

My key takeaway from this article is that we should just ignore Threads.

Let Threads be its own thing, and the rest of the Fediverse should just do its own thing, likewise.

https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html

If we really wanted to embrace, extend, and extinguish something, it should be Threads.

Embrace Threads. Extend whatever proprietary API they are using. Extinguish them by converting Threads' loyal users into loyal users of the rest of the Fediverse.

Having Threads federate should have been their undoing, but by neurotically blocking Threads, we are instead accelerating the Fediverse's decline.

The fear and reaction regarding the possibility of Meta enacting "embrace, extend, extinguish" of ActivityPub and the rest of the Fediverse is starting to feel a lot like a self-fulfilling prophecy.

"I can't interact with my friends on Threads from my server that has Threads blocked. I guess I'll just join Threads so that I can finally interact with them on Threads"

Some folks from social.coop are doing an amazing job of mapping out the arguments for and against federating with Meta's Chains(1) server, if and when it starts federating over AP:

https://pad.disroot.org/p/Social.coop_Threads.net_argument_map

(1) I refuse to call it "Threads", as I see this as an attempt to trademark and thus privatise a generic term commonly used in the verse, and the web in general.

(Edit: it's a work in progress)

Here's a story that illustrates why I favour federating with Chains ("Threads"), even though I'm opposed to Meta's very existence.

Alice and Bob follow each other on InstaGrope. Alice, being more of an early adopter, signs up for Chains, and convinces Bob to do the same. Then Chains turns on AP federation. Alice realises she can still follow and talk to all the same people on Chains from other fediverse servers, and moves to one.

(1/2)

I was just wondering - what's the point of #AntiMetaFediPact?
A huge selling point of #Mastodon is that nothing interferes with your feed. Why not let users decide which domain to block?

Since Meta is trying to federate us, I'll be locking down my account to private until the Meta instance is up an running and until I can block it entirely. The reason I do that, because this way, no one can follow me from that instance, so my account data would not get pulled out to Meta's instance. :)
Sorry for the inconvenience! #AntiMeta #Meta #AntiMetaFediPact #Threads #FediBlock

The first thing I'm gonna to when Threads will launch is to block the entire domain if Eugen chooses not to. #AntiMeta #AntiMetaFediPact #Meta #Threads

"Is the goal of the Fediverse to be anti-corporate/anti-commercial, or to be pro-openness?"

#JohnGruber

https://daringfireball.net/linked/2023/06/19/not-that-kind-of-open

I have huge respect for Jon Gruber - especially after his brave and empathetic talk on the many harms of public shaming ("Cancel Culture") - so I'm going to take some time to unpack this.

(1/?)

@doodlebrink
Das #Fediverse beruht auf dem dezentralen Ansatz.
Ein einzelner kommerzieller Anbieter mit Milliarden Nutzern würde ganz klar dominieren, könnte seine eigenen Regeln und Weltansichten durchsetzen, alles andere ignorieren und so den dezentralen Ansatz ad absurdum führen.

Die Befürchtung ist also, dass Meta das Fediverse praktisch übernehmen will.
Dass hier jetzt die nackte Angst umgeht, finde ich durchaus verständlich.

This is from a few months back, but still pertinent: How Meta's new project P92 could deliver the killing blow to Twitter...and why the fediverse should be on alert
https://www.lifewire.com/how-metas-new-project-p92-could-deliver-the-killing-blow-to-twitter-7255582 #Fediverse #Meta #AntiMetaFediPact #AntiMetaPact