Should sh.itjust.works preemptively defederate from Threads?
Threads is the not-so-new reddit-like twitter-like public forum platform by Meta, the same commercial company behind internet behemoths like Facebook, Instagram and Whatsapp. They’re working on ActivityPub integration so that they can bridge (federate?) with the fediverse. As far as I know, the focus is on Mastodon instances, but in the future that could include Lemmy instances too.
Some have raised the question, worried about the future of the fediverse or even claiming that it goes against its definition.
What do you think should be done?
EDIT: correction
EDIT.2: The Vote is on! Go make your voice heard. You have until Friday the 29th.
I have no interest in welcoming Facebook/Meta/Zuckerburg’s Big Goddamn Fucky Wucky Company to the Fediverse. I would vote to defederate from Threads and any instance federated with them.
my take on it is that i am completely against any kind of bridging between the platforms. i do think the fediverse in general is in danger, by being a victim of the “Embrace, Extend, Extinguish” strategy
as many on lemmy, i use this platform because of its decentralized, open-source, not-for-profit nature, and think the whole fediverse community would be in jeopardy if we don’t act
Defederation is meaningless, what matters is the dev side. Federating doesn’t give them anything they couldn’t get other ways for slightly more effort. The problems come if you allow contributions the greater community doesn’t want to the code itself.
My bigger concern is content being overwhelmed by a flood of accounts that have a different online culture from what has grown and is still developing here.
I’m less concerned about the culture aspect, but there’s probably some room to improve how federation works at a technical level so smaller instances aren’t crushed if someone subscribes to large communities.
This feels like an uninformed take. Have you interacted with people on Mastodon via a Lemmy instance? They’re clueless about the fact that they are replying to a forum post or that there’s more than one thread of the conversation going on that most people can see and interact with. The conversations tend to be awkward.
would like to had this more informed and well articulated take on why federation with Threads would be bad
If people are not ready or are not looking for freedom, that’s fine. They have the right to stay on proprietary platforms. We should not force them into the Fediverse. We should not try to include as many people as we can at all cost. We should be honest and ensure people join the Fediverse because they share some of the values behind it.
And that is why I am voting to defed.
it seems they are already testing the integration
Exactly. I’m almost always against defederation, but the risk of EEE is why I’m in favor of preemptively defederating.
I can’t bring myself to care whether or not someone using a Facebook app can get a shit post in their feed.
Wut
If and when Meta becomes “federated”, I 100% will be on team DEFEDERATE.
Facebook should be quarantined as much as possible.
The fun option would be to flood threads with shitposts and make them defederate from us when they start to lose advertisers
They will just hide that content in their platform
The way Threads works currently from what I understand is that they can send content to other instances, but not receive. Makes it seem even more useless if it’s one-sided.
What do you see as the risks to the larger fediverse in having Meta federated?
What benefit does Meta hope to see?
What do you see as the risks to the larger fediverse in having Meta federated?
for me the main risk would be the loss of freedom, as in the open way it is developed. if threads is openly weaved to the fediverse, their closed development methodology will dictate it’s future by virtue of its monopoly and the way for that future will not be defined by the interests of the larger community - as it generally is now with the fediverse’s platforms and apps open standards
a second important risk is the quality of the conversation will likely drop abruplty. the dominance of the userbase will be too big too fast. i’d like for e.g. Lemmy to grow and keep on growing (not that i care that much about it) but i think this would not be the way to do it
What benefit does Meta hope to see?
the benefit any company seeks with any new product or implementation: to increase it’s bottom-line, AKA money
how? one way is using everything that’s going on in the fediverse as ‘content’ for their users - who they’d be “milking” for said bottom-line. and that content’s upkeep, that would bring them said profit, would not cost them a thing
EDIT: grammar
I’m for the preemptive de-federation.
I’m taking off my admin hat and commenting as a user…
One minor correction to OP’s post: Threads is a X/Twitter clone, not a Reddit clone.
I’m in the wait-and-see camp. If Threads someday links to Lemmy, and if it becomes problematic for the function or culture of the platform, then I will be in favor of cutting them off.
As @ryathal@sh.itjust.works mentioned, the real risk is that Meta starts steering Lemmy development in its favor. I don’t foresee that happening given that dessalines and nutomic oversee code contributions, and they certainly won’t allow it.As an aside, I’m not convinced Threads will last long to begin with. It isn’t looking like the X killer that Meta seemed to be hoping for. Meta has been trying to artificially drive engagement by creating shadow accounts for Facebook/Instagram users, and sticking Threads posts in people’s Facebook feeds. Integrating with Mastodon feels like a further attempt to entice Meta users to adopt a microblogging app that nobody asked for. At this rate it may fizzle and die before they ever get around to interacting with Lemmy.
This is my exact take as well. Defed if there is an issue, but wait and see first. I hate the kneejwrk reaction to circle the wagons here. I have been hating on Facebook for as long as anyone l, but this place badly needs content and users so I am willing to see where this goes.
can threads not just kill all other instances with their huge number of posts that would come through and hide everything else?
Yeah, even if Meta acts with 100% good will, and the Threads users are wonderful and respectful, Threads is about 50x as big as the entire Fediverse, and Lemmy is a fraction of that Fediverse.
https://lemmy.whynotdrs.org/post/494473
Starting out with the floodgates open could lead to Lemmy getting overwhelmed. (Plus, it could cause server costs to skyrocket.)
It makes the most sense to start out with Threads blocked, then (if Meta is behaving) to allow a trickle in to see how that goes.
This is my main concern. The admins and mods are not ready for floodgates to open like this. And people using and enjoying Lemmy despite its imperfections will be soured quickly by the experience.
Ask yourself why do they want to join the fediverse if they don’t get anything out of it? Also, what would they be contributing to the fediverse besides more people. Every time I see more people, it’s not great people, or thoughtful people or even shitty stars, it’s just more people. Crowds help the fediverse how? It’s like going to your quiet cafe and being overwhelmed by the sound of it.
You’ve probably seen this analogy because I’ve posted it way too much, but I think it really holds true:
I’ve used this analogy before, but threads is like a huge, 5k passenger cruise ship docking in a small town in Alaska. You don’t have to know ahead of time that the 2 public bathrooms, one at the general store and the other at McDonalds, aren’t going to be enough. You can also forecast the complaining about how everything isn’t really tourist ready. It will suck for everyone. The small museum will be overrun and damaged, the people will be treated like dirt. It’s an easy forecast.
Here’s the important bit, just because they’ve never been in the cruise line business, doesn’t mean you have to give them a chance to ruin your town.
I’m in favour of anything that prevents Meta’s enshittification of everything.
Yep. Defederate.
Everyone must only answer this question for themselves: Do you want to have extra content at the cost of potentially more ads & tracking? Because that’s their current monetization model.
How would another instance inject ads and tracking into this instance? If that’s possible, then that’s a serious security issue far bigger than Facebook, and is the real thing we should be discussing
Sponsored posts.
Interesting. I mean they could do this, but would need votes to make it to people’s feeds. Would they spam fake votes to game it? I doubt it; at least as a first run.
Otherwise I guess unless people sort by newest, they wouldn’t interfere.
A middle ground for them would be sponsored posted via certain accounts that people could block if they didn’t want to see them. But like I mean a specific set of accounts and not ones they can just add and remove to make new sponsored posts appear. Maybe a sponsored account type that could be blocked at a user level.
Though all of this is what ifs: I’d say defederate if they don’t play ball responsibly. They aren’t even targeting Lemmy stuff atm. More like Mastodon.
Honestly federating with threads makes me more likely to use Mastodon. Otherwise very few people I know or care about are on it (Mastodon).
spam fake votes
Why not? They already manipulate their feed on Facebook, why not do it on Threads as well? Yeah, they probably wouldn’t do it at launch, but they’ll probably work it in later.
That’s not really what I’m worried about though, I’m more worried about my content being used to manipulate other users. I still don’t want to see ads though.
sponsored posts via certain accounts
They’ll probably just pay regular users to shill stuff. So ads won’t be “buy X,” but instead “X is great, I use it every day!”
I doubt they’d make something easily blockable like a unique account type visible to lemmy. Why would they? That would reduce their reach.
all of this is what ifs
Sure, but it’s not like there isn’t a ton of evidence to be skeptical. Meta makes almost all of its money through advertising. So they’re going to make advertising a major part of any product they make. That’s what they do, and calling that a “what if” is silly.
The real question is not if, but how much it’ll impact lemmy. I don’t see any reason to think they won’t try to monetize lemmy users, so why give them the benefit of the doubt?
For those out of the loop, Mark Zuckerberg recently made an announcement on Threads
oh shhh…people, today is friday, the day to open up votes here in The Agora. but this discussion has only been up for less than 2 days
is it too soon to start a vote? should we wait for the next week? i don’t want to press anyone but feel some urgency about this issues since, in case we defederate, it should be done at rhe start od this process, it seems to me
Don’t defederate immediately, but do it automatically three months after threads goes live if users don’t explicitly vote to keep it around. I wouldn’t mind seeing how it goes at first.
Defederate pls
![[Discussion] Pre-emptive Threads defederation](https://sh.itjust.works/pictrs/image/110b9a64-3945-4558-a7f0-4276854c3731.jpeg){kind=link}