I'm glad, meta has no place in the fediverse.
Chat
Relaxed section for discussion and debate that doesn't fit anywhere else. Whether it's advice, how your week is going, a link that's at the back of your mind, or something like that, it can likely go here.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
Amazing. Thank you!
Awesome!
War is coming. Thank you for taking a strong stance now rather than later.
Meta was one of the killers of democracy. No one should ever affiliate with it.
I donβt know if I have a settled opinion for or against defederating from Meta instances, but I know enough to say I absolutely respect the decision to.
I may appreciate more exposure to federating social media, but I also appreciate that Meta has a problematic track record. Besides, my shifting away from Reddit has me realizing that juggling accounts is not as difficult as I thought. If I end up having a reason to get on a Meta instance, it wouldnβt be an issue to make a compatible handle that can communicate there.
I'm not shure, there are a few good arguments against plain blocking of Meta.
This article is mostly against federating
https://privacy.thenexus.today/should-the-fediverse-welcome-surveillance-capitalism/
it does highlight contra's:
John Gruber describes the Anti-Meta Pact as "petty and deliberately insular" and suggests that the whole point of ActivityPub is to turn social networking into something more akin to email, which he describes as "truly open."1
Tristan Louis says "The anti-Meta #Fedipact can only achieve one thing: make sure that #ActivityPub loses to the Bluesky protocol."2
Dan Gillmor suggests that "preemptively blocking them -- and the people already using them -- from your instance guarantees less relevance for the fediverse."
Gruber's position is somewhere between 'internally inconsistent' and 'distressingly naive'; quote:
On point 2, Iβm fine with starting Facebook with two strikes against it. Put them on a short leash. They start fucking around, Mastodon instances should start de-federating from their product.
So he agrees that the first time Facebook does anything wrong we should promptly de-federate from them, but somehow seems to think that they... won't? Facebook being allowed to federate is contingent on them being absolutely perfect model citizens, when Facebook have never been model citizens of any group they've ever participated in?
better to just keep growing slowly rather than having massive capital and quick improvements only to be killed later by Meta.
The goal of the fediverse was never to be "relevant" in corporate capital terms.
The goal was for us all to be able to use it.
Being embrace-extend-extinguished would not achieve what most of us are here for.
Really pleased to hear this. I will be staying on Beehaw for the foreseeable future, I'm on the same page as the admins.
Thank you!!!! Say NO to META's disregard of privacy!!!
I salute you!
Thank goodness.
kudos
Great, fuck Meta, fuck Zuck.
How do we even know that they're not already running instances? Why would they start announcing it, especially after the response?
This has to do with Project92, not just with Facebook hosting Mastodon instances. I wouldn't put it past them to discretely host instances to gather data, but we can't see them, and therefore we can't defend against them (and mass-defederation of potential instances is a recipe for disaster).
Glad to hear it. Over the years, Meta has shown that they donβt deserve the benefit of the doubt. Theyβd have to prove themselves, which I suspect they are able (but 100% not willing) to do.