I think it's pretty safe to say that the majority of us are here to avoid another corporate takeover of our preferred platforms. It would seem to me to be a tad irresponsible to allow Facebook into our space with open arms, allowing them to hoover up our data. I would love to keep using Lemmy.world, but will happily change instances if need be, and I feel many share that sentiment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] recapitated@lemmy.world 24 points 11 months ago (1 children)

If the majority of us are truly here specifically to enjoy the freedom of choice, then it would follow that peering with Facebook wouldn't be a major risk for active users here, and possibly an opportunity to reach a less savvy audience.

Lemmy and mastodon are platforms good for connecting broadly. There could even be a separate instance that is a subsidiary division of a major player.

And as far as hoovering up our data, we're already out here putting it out there. Don't put sensitive data on here and don't sign up for an instance owned by surveillance-capitalists.

[–] derpgon@programming.dev 13 points 11 months ago (2 children)

They are not federating with anyone as far as I heard, so why federated with them.

[–] recapitated@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

Yeah the mutuality argument is a strong one IMO.

It would be great if the fediverse did have the leverage to influence meta to accept other content.

At the same time, I wonder if there could ever be an implementation that detects asymmetrical & unfair practices across instances to give them consequences in real time.

[–] recapitated@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

I also wonder how the rest of the fediverse can do better to demonstrate its value, in terms of users and content, which would cause threads users to desire content from us.