Feeding #Threads trash into #Mastodon is the functional equivalent of when Tom Sawyer got the other kids to whitewash the fence for him for free. Only in this case Tom is Zuckerberg and his cohorts, laughing at the "Fediverse" rubes.
@lauren I'm not sure I understand the objection. Why should I care, as a reader, what platform someone I follow uses to post, or, as a poster, what platform someone who wants to follow me reads me on?
@kolya@f800gecko@lauren I get that there are ample reasons to mistrust Facebook (which is why I don't personally use it). But I don't see how this is different from any other federated site run by sketchy entities (of which there are already plenty).
@mattblaze@kolya@f800gecko Please name the federated sites operating on a significant for-profit basis. Not talking about just trying to cover costs plus a bit. I mean ads, the whole works. Like Meta.
@lauren@kolya@f800gecko I don't know. I don't keep track of them. But I know there are federated sites run by a variety of entities, many with policies and ideologies I disagree with. And mostly, I don't notice. I don't see how this is different.
I'm not trying to be difficult. At two of your followers have called me stupid for not seeing something obvious here. But I really don't see the cause for alarm here.
@mattblaze@kolya@f800gecko Well, I haven't called you stupid. I might suggest you are being a bit naive on this particular issue, but nobody's perfect.
@mattblaze
Yes, I don't either. I heard some fears of embrace and extinguish tactics, ie FB might extend protocol with proprietary features etc, but I don't see that working out realistically. @f800gecko@lauren
@mattblaze@f800gecko@lauren Honestly, I also don’t have a clue. And I do have a degree in social sciences - to address the one person who’s not good at explaining things but rather insults others instead.
@mattblaze@lauren There is no push mechanism. If anything from Threads shows up here, it is because someone from here is following someone on Threads, or because someone boosts the content. There is nothing that gives Zuck the power to push unsolicited stuff into the Fediverse, the way he does on Facebook, Instagram, and Threads.
@mattblaze@lauren Yes, I agree with you. The sheer size of Threads, and their tolerance for things that aren't acceptable here, may be a problem. But I think it would be better to wait and see how it plays out. Instances who allow federation with Threads now are free to change later.
@mattblaze@not2b Meta has a clear and present financial motive to push as much as possible (and boost engagement on those posts) -- and will always be happy to spew a pipeline of sewage toward Mastodon (where a financial motive doesn't exist for all practical purposes) for anyone who likes to swallow deeply of such. Meta will NEVER be willing to permit a flow back from Mastodon/Fediverse that isn't heavily restricted and subject to arbitrary cutoffs, especially if content threatens Meta's financial interests. Clear enough for a starting point?
@lauren@not2b Yes, I understand why I shouldn't trust them. I don't use Meta services. But I don't see how their joining fedi will affect my experience from my own instance.
I mean, maybe it will. I just don't understand what's being predicted here.
@mattblaze@not2b That depends. If you're ethically comfortable with helping such an entity profit (or at least attempt to profit) off the work of Mastodon/Fediverse sites -- and offering nothing in return in terms of comparable value -- then that's a personal ethical decision. Presumably you can plug your ears to avoid hearing Zuck's laughter!
@mattblaze@not2b Not at all. I didn't say you were being unethical. I said you have to decide if your ethics are compatible with the situation. Apparently they are.
@mattblaze@lauren@not2b I don't fully understand myself, but my default is that on average Meta does nothing that doesn't benefit it's shareholders, they do not have the common good as a core value and they are one of the prime practioners of enshittification. I may not fully grasp why yet, but the less involvement with them the better.
@mattblaze@lauren@not2b I see how it will affect my own experience: it will enable communication with a few good people I know who, for reasons I don't comprehend, don't mind Zuckworld, and for reasons I do get, don't grok or don't like Mastodon.
@oclsc@mattblaze@lauren@not2b using the internet is a constant trade off between Privacy and Utility. Threads as a user experience is just better than most open Fedi platforms and that is going to attract a lot of people who are not inclined to spend the time to learn how to interact with the Fediverse in a more traditional way.
Meta is providing an on ramp for a lot of people to a world of utility they simply couldn’t access otherwise. Ostracizing people who choose to use that on ramp (at the cost of some of their privacy) is a little bit more “gatekeepy” than I’m comfortable with.
@MrWhiskers@mattblaze@lauren@not2b I think it's less about what Threads is than what Mastodon isn't. Mastodon is a bit off-putting because of the multi-server model, but the real barrier for some is the lack of An Algorithm. I curated my own feed with follows and avoided For You on Twitter, but apparently many don't, and can't see how to build their own interesting feed. It's a real problem for adoption, not that I want Mastodon to go that way.
I think that's definitely part of it; mastodon is just harder for many without a tech affinity to use well. There is a significant minority (at least I hope it's only a minority) here who think that's GOOD, and that artificial barriers are a good way to keep out "uncommitted" users. Balderdash, I say.
@oclsc@MrWhiskers@not2b Some of this is mistrust of Zuckerberg/Meta, and I share that mistrust. But I think a large portion is also an aversion to being "invaded" by "normies", which has manifested itself here in other discussions that have nothing to do with Threads.
@oclsc@MrWhiskers@mattblaze@lauren@not2b I think that indeed at most 1 in 20 posts here is interesting, but that ratio was not better on Twitter with An Algorithm.
@erwinrossen@oclsc@MrWhiskers@lauren@not2b That's perhaps true for YOU. Everyone isn't like you. Not everyone is as connected to social media or comfortable experimenting with it as you are. Having a scheme to help identify users to follow or surface posts that might be of interest has value for some people, even if it migh not for you.
@erwinrossen@oclsc@MrWhiskers@lauren@not2b Meta is awful, and tolerates awfulness by its users. On the other hand, it's equipped to serve diverse communities, including many good people who aren't well served by the complexities of Mastodon instances. Federating with Threads is a tradeoff, and it's not at all clear to me how to balance it.
@mattblaze@lauren Matt, this is a much discussed topic on Mastodon and social media generally. Here's the short objection list.
These other platforms like Threads are untrustworthy in that their access to your info may be monetized, ads sold or lists sold or otherwise compromise vulnerable people without any control short of defederating after the fact. Their track record is bad with regard to privacy and commercial subversion.
Exposing Federated users to bots, trolls, racists, Nazis and other malevolent users on the commercial algorithms without everyone's consent may degrade and pollute the social aspect of Mastodon in uncontrollable ways.
I think Mastodon needs to be able to withstand this; if it doesn't, it seems doomed whether Meta itself is involved or not. Perhaps this is a useful test.
Anyway, I have no idea what will happen, and obviously others are more alarmed about this than I am, so I'll respectfully decline to comment or inquire further.
@mattblaze@aka_quant_noir@lauren If I am allowed to reply guy to this: I too find "we dont like Meta" lacking a rationale for excluding Threads.
However, too much centralisation of control will indeed make the #fediverse vulnerable. And too big instances are the main contributing factor, so limiting instance size would likely be a reasonable countermeasure. Ironically, that wouldnt only apply to Threads, but also to e.g. instances run by #mastodon s founder.
@mattblaze@lauren From what I understand, if somebody participates with threads and they reply or react to my post then my post is part of threads, which is part of meta, which is collecting data to sell to megacorporations.
And if I was OK with Zucchini having my data I would just go join thread myself.
I guess I have to figure out how to block it here. Idk this reminded me that I have to figure that out.
@mattblaze@lauren you aren't aware of the decade-long problems (privacy, human rights, security, propaganda, psych manipulation, resulting observable reduction in happiness and comaraderie, veracity of public information, etc etc etc) with corporate social media, and you want us to explain it? And you seem to become mad when incredulous people seem confused that you wouldn't know any of this? Goodness, and I thought this was widely understood.