• Lvxferre@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    The core idea of the fediverse is the same as democracy - that nobody should control the whole. Both are similar enough to allow comparisons.

    Threads in the Fediverse is like a powerful dictatorship trying to “deepen its bonds” with a small but democratic government. The dictatorship will eventually exploit the power asymmetry to control the democracy, direct or indirectly, effectively erasing it. In that situation, the best approach is to simply not play along the dictatorship. (Defederate Threads.)

    Another threat to democracy is internal: the centralisation of control over the whole into a few hands. In the case of the Fediverse, this is the reliance on central systems (front-end software, back-end software, instances, discovery systems, etc.). I see what the author proposes as a “Universal Declaration on Fediverse Rights” as, potentially, a new mechanism enabling those central systems - who gets to decide what goes in that declaration?

    So yes, I think that instances should defederate Threads and encourage other instances to do so. However, they should not do it too hard, to the point that you’re effectively dictating what others should be doing.

    An important detail is that the author falls into the fallacy of conflating epistemic and moral matters. This is specially explicit here:

    Because without believing in the existence of a objective truth (which they don’t, because they attribute themselves to moral relativism),

    That fallacy has a deep impact across the text because the author believes that people can eventually agree on moral grounds based on reason. Often they don’t - because it depends on the moral premises that each adopt, and moral premises are not true/false matters to begin with.

    the actual problem is that the Fediverse is internally shattered and cannot agree on anything, including basic moral rules and principles.

    That is not a problem. That’s a feature.

  • Outsider9042@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    It might have been fake, but weren’t there already reports of Meta blocking links/tags in relation to pixelfed?

    If it’s true, they’ve already proven to be a bad faith actor. I wouldn’t be surprised if they’re already scraping data from every other instance that federates with them.

    At the end of the day, one side will be right. My moneys on the anti-threads side.

    • helenslunch@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      but weren’t there already reports of Meta blocking links/tags in relation to pixelfed?

      Much more likely a result of Meta’s notoriously shitty auto moderation algorithms than anything nefarious. I promise Meta is not risking the bad press and potential legal litigation to censor a service with 22k MAU.

      they’ve already proven to be a bad faith actor.

      They’ve done this for decades.

      I wouldn’t be surprised if they’re already scraping data from every other instance that federates with them.

      I don’t know why people keep spreading this nonsense. If your instance is publicly visible (which it is) then Meta is likely already scraping it. They do not need federation to do that.

  • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    I mean there are a shitload of reasons to not federate with Threads, but I feel like “it will federate ads to your server” is kinda the only one I should need to mention.