A lot of people dislike it for the privacy nightmare that it is and feel the threat of an EEE attack. This will also probably not be the last time that a big corporation will insert itself in the Fediverse.

However, people also say that it will help get ActivityPub and the Fediverse go more mainstream and say that corporations don't have that much influence on the Fediverse since people are in control of their own servers.

What a lot of posts have in common is that they want some kind of action to be taken, whether it'd be mass defederating from Threads, or accept them in some way that does not harm the Fediverse as much.

What actions can we take to deal with Threads?

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

[–] solidgrue@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

having the largest userbase, and therefore the most and best content

This is a non sequiter argument. It does not necessarily follow that good content comes from a large userbase. In fact, both of those things are rarely true at the same time. points vaguely at social media

I'm not saying Meta isn't going to try to run the EEE playbook at some point. Its likely they will, but we are all already skeptical about it. More likely, the play now is to capitalize on the discontent and missteps over at Twitter, and capture the folks over there who are leaving¹. Mastodon and ActivityPub are a functional, free and open source implementation they can use to bootstrap a micro blogging and DM service that supports the familiar hashtag semantics. If they even decide to federate with us, it's probably just an afterthought. We're small, and already quite hostile.

Now... Is there value in having a gateway to that content? That's arguable. I find the kind of stuff posted on Insta to be vapid enough or sufficiently commercial that I feel no need to interact with it. I probably still wouldn't interact with it even if it happens to show up here. Same for the herpaderp-maga dingbats and their chicanery wandering into discussion threads. Down vote, block, move on. For certain, I would never get back into bed with Meta because-- c'mon-- they're Meta, and they're a known quantity. Same as if Google, Amazon, Apple, Reddit (and other failed social media giants) signed on. If their content is available here and of high enough quality to interact with then I'll interact with it from here or I won't interface at all. But no, I won't go into your walled garden to play with your toys. "My terms take em or leave em," and I think a lot of us feel the same way, deep down.

I do, however, think corporate engagement here IS valuable. In the same way that social media teams at your favorite retail brands engage on the Big Socials, I would also welcome their engagement here as well because its another avenue to interact with the brand as a potential, current or disgruntled customer. There's no reason the media teams at Nabisco or Target couldn't set up their own instance and interact with users on other instances. If they play along with us in flgood faith, it works. If they start being evil corporations they get defedersted and lose engagement.

ActivityPub isn't going anywhere. It's a standard and a suite of software implementations that nobody can take away. The early adopters are here the community is vibrant llterally in spite of Big Social and now the entrepreneurs are following.

Anyway, I think you're right to be wary of this move, and about the prospects of the EEE playbook being deployed here as well. I also think we can afford to be a little more sanguine about it for the moment because Meta's enemy is making a mistake, and we happen to be the arms dealer this week.

Make popcorn and watch the theater. I just read Twitter is suing Meta already, so you know this is gonna be fun!

¹ Conspiracy theory (I just can't help myself!): On today's episode of Billionare Behaving Badly, Zuck underwrites a portion of Musk's Twitterbuyout. Musk trashes the brand and liquidates the stock. Tesla buys the infrastructure and Meta buys the user base and their analytics

[–] Coelacanth@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

This is a non sequiter argument. It does not necessarily follow that good content comes from a large userbase. In fact, both of those things are rarely true at the same time. points vaguely at social media

I was coming at it from the perspective of an ex-Reddit user. The main appeal of that site to me was (is?) the size of the userbase and the fact it meant you had access to literally any type of person at your fingertips. Every niche interest was represented, there were people of all ages and walks of life and you could find help or others in the same boat no matter what tech issue you faced or rare ailment you contracted. This type of "content" if you can call it that is only available once the population reaches a certain critical mass. Smaller communities are of course more conducive to civil discussion, high-effort posting and actual conversations, but looking at the popularity of that social media you're gesturing towards I'm not sure that's what the majority of people are even after.

It's not that I want to attract Facebook users to Lemmy, it's more that Threads as an alternative could well siphon other users who might have otherwise come over here, ending up preventing this site from reaching critical mass. Then again, maybe this particular fear is overexaggerated right now since - as you say - Threads is competing with Twitter and not Reddit/Lemmy.

I find the kind of stuff posted on Insta to be vapid enough or sufficiently commercial that I feel no need to interact with it. I probably still wouldn’t interact with it even if it happens to show up here.

I think the problem is twofold here really. First is the All feed, which by function of how the engagement algorithm works would instantly get flooded with content from Threads if they end up federated, drowning out the content from here. It would not be a matter of deciding not to engage with the post from Threads and keeping scrolling. You wouldn't browse Lemmy anymore, it would just be Threads and Meta all the way down.

Second is the comment sections to any discussion even on communities here would likely get flooded with Facebook comments. By sheer volume of users they have already too many of them would find their way here. And it is again not exactly the type of - let's call it "discourse" - I'm chomping at the bit to partake in.

More likely, the play now is to capitalize on the discontent and missteps over at Twitter, and capture the folks over there who are leaving¹.

I think you're absolutely right and I think if Zuckerberg even knows what "Lemmy" is then it's because somebody mentioned it in passing when briefing him about ActivityPub. It's clear trying to usurp Twitter has been planned for a long time and you can understand why. If Lemmy was involved in the thought process at all, it would only be as inspiration for how Threads could in the future be connected to yet another new platform which in that case would outcompete Reddit, which is a site I'm sure Zuckerberg would very much like to usurp as well.

I do, however, think corporate engagement here IS valuable. In the same way that social media teams at your favorite retail brands engage on the Big Socials, I would also welcome their engagement here as well because its another avenue to interact with the brand as a potential, current or disgruntled customer.

But social media teams at your favorite brands don't connect on social media in order to contact disgruntled customers or discuss consumer concerns, they do it because it's great, cheap advertising. RyanAir doesn't use twitter to ask customers if the uncomfortable seats injured their backs, they make funny tweets because they believe it will sell more cheap plane tickets.

Hell, even if the social media admin appears to be discussing actual issues with consumers I doubt those issues would go anywhere afterwards. The big brands aren't interested in consumer concerns but they probably wouldn't mind looking like they are since that would make people more sympathetic towards them and more likely to chose their product.

Make popcorn and watch the theater. I just read Twitter is suing Meta already, so you know this is gonna be fun!

Can we arrange for a cage to be built in the courtroom and schedule it so Zuck and Elon give their testimonies in between the rounds of beating the shit out of each other?

[–] solidgrue@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Well stated! I agree wirh you on most of it The only point I want to make is:

the size of the userbase and the fact it meant you had access to literally any type of person at your fingertips

The niche communities themselves tended to be small and focused, which is what I say improved the quality of the content. Contrast with the large, default sub's when I think we both agree failed to add value. I say that communities happened to accrete there was because it was low effort and low friction. Now, not so much. It was a naked grab for cash by usurping the uncompensated efforts of a few dedicated people. The true believers moved on.

As a market place of ideas, reddit was a good mega mall. The anchors sucked but the boutiques were cool. Now it's just a great big building full of disregarded storefronts after the holiday sales have ended.