Hi!!! I’m a strategist/entrepreneur/software engineer/activist, focusing on the intersection of justice, equity, and software engineering. I’ve been on the fediverse for a long time and am currently checking out /KBin. @jdp23@indieweb.social is my main account on
That just shows how little Eugen understands the privacy risks. Why just blocking Meta’s Threads won’t be enough to protect your privacy once they join the fediverse has an example of how federating with Meta can expose private data. And, data can be public but hard to discover (a profile for somebody who only makes followers-only and local-only posts); federating with Threads adds exposure.
I think we’re in violent agreement here: getting the EU to drop their objections is certainly one way around them! So yeah, they’ll probably try to use the demand for Threads to push back on the DMA’s anti-trust-ish provisions (which as I understand is the current blockage). And then they’ll try to use their ActivityPub integration to push back on the interoperability requirements, no doubt characterizing them as unrealistic. It’s predictable but still irritating.
Not at all. I talked about this in In chaos there is opportunity! Meta’s potential arrival is a likely to be a good thing for the fediverse no matter whether or not they actually go forward with it.
Yes, I certainly constructed the sentence to highlight the different reactions. Later in the article I say “And by prioritizing their desire to be embraced by Meta over queer and trans people’s safety, Meta’s cis advocates undercut their claims to be allies in ways that may be hard to recover from” – which is true no matter what Meta does or doesn’t wind up doing with Threads. Of course it’s not the only thing going on, but I think it’s important enough that it’s worth highlighting.
Yep. Federation could conceivably respond to the EU’s requirement for interoperability – and they could do it in a way that puts a lot of barriers to people actually moving, so works well for them. Of course the EU would say that didn’t meet the requirement, which would lead to a multi-year legal battle and eventually Meta would probably pay a billion dollar fine (as they routinely do – it’s just a cost of doing business) and promise to remove the barriers (which they wouldn’t, and then there would be another multi-year legal battle).
But none of that works if the EU won’t allow Threads for some other reason!
Still, my guess is that they’ll figure out a way around the EU’s objections to Threads … we shall see …
A name for forum- and aggregator-style fediverse software. and instances sounds like a good idea to me. I agree with the points you and @ada@ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone make elsewhere in the thread about the problem that most people coming from Twitter currently equate Mastodon with the “fediverse” as equivalent to Mastodon (a problem in general because it leads to centralization and marginalizing other implementations, and an even bigger problem currently because of Mastodon’s reputation for anti-blackness and reply-guyism), and not wanting to have similar dynamics with people coming from reddit.
I’ll have to think more about the specific term threadiverse. I see what you’re getting at but Mastodon / Pleroma / CalcKey etc all have threads as well even from a microblogging perspective, and Kbin also has a microblog (as opposed to forum) view.
Thanks, it’s a good point!