this post was submitted on 24 Jun 2023
361 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37754 readers
320 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Full report is on The Verge.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Dee_Imaginarium@beehaw.org 113 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Before everyone freaks out, this has zero impact on our communities. Chill.

They can already do this by bringing content from Mastodon to Meta platforms via links and screen grabs, this only speeds up the process.

Personally, I love that they're not federating day one. Because I don't want any instances I use to federate with them, I don't want to be connected to a Meta platform unless I deliberately go to a Meta platform to use it.

To expedite the process, Mastodon instances should just defederate from them entirely. Don't let them access that data through ActivityPub. They can build their own platform on the Fediverse and we can have our network of smaller connected instances.

Them doing this does not affect our communities unless we let it. Defederate from them and we can go on our merry way and they can have their own ad laden instance that's not connected.

Everyone, relax. Continue building your communities here and ignore Meta in their unconnected instances.

[–] Echutaa@kbin.social 46 points 1 year ago (3 children)
[–] Dee_Imaginarium@beehaw.org 55 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

I've seen that article and no, we still don't need to be worried. Just defederate and that's all. As evidenced by the final paragraph:

Fediverse can only win by keeping its ground, by speaking about freedom, morals, ethics, values. By starting open, non-commercial and non-spied discussions. By acknowledging that the goal is not to win. Not to embrace. The goal is to stay a tool. A tool dedicated to offer a place of freedom for connected human beings. Something that no commercial entity will ever offer.

Just keep using it as the community building tool it is, defederate and protect those communities and we're golden.

Everybody relax.

[–] IninewCrow@kbin.social 44 points 1 year ago (2 children)

One important key lesson that everyone misses is funding ... we have to normalize paying a bit of money through donations or subscriptions to those people that maintain instances and those people who maintain, update and build the software ... if we all just keep tell ourselves that we all just keep our heads down, lock the door and don't bother to pay anyone to keep the door locked ... the same problems of the past will always emerge .... Owners, developers, programmers, instance maintainers just running out of money and enthusiasm because they have the shoulder the financial costs while everyone ignores them and takes everything for granted.

If we all just keep expecting volunteers to keep everything running for us for free ... eventually we will run out of willing volunteers as the community grows and the costs add up over time as instances grow more popular

SUPPORT YOUR INSTANCE ... whatever platform it is and whatever amount of money you can give ... even if it means we just give a dollar a day, across hundreds or thousands of user, it will protect your instance owner, and ensure that the people running your instance never run into a situation where they have to decide on either ending their work ... or selling everything they have to make a bit of money back.

[–] Dee_Imaginarium@beehaw.org 8 points 1 year ago

Couldn't agree more! I think that message might deserve it's own post but you did a great little write up here on the importance of supporting your instance!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Kichae@kbin.social 18 points 1 year ago (4 children)

The microblogging corner of the fediverse definitely needs a bit of restructuring to make it robust against something like this. A lot of people are on larger servers that are openly inviting Meta, even excited about their arrival, and believe very strongly that the space should be completely open.

They actively speak of people not wanting to federate with everyone as trying to "destroy" the Fediverse by making people who are totally married to a non-distributed service model fear or detest the space. There are many people on their websites who think they want something like this to happen, so that "everyone" will be here, and it'll be just like on Twitter (or something). But I don't think they're actually going to like it once the space is flooded with people who are jacked up on psychological manipulation and who don't even know the rest of space exists.

The people who come to the Fediverse and stay all end up saying the same thing: "It feels like what X used to feel like". And X used to feel that way because corporate interests weren't pushing their anger and aggravation buttons every 15 seconds, nor that of everyone they interacted with. But the space will be dominated by people getting poked and prodded for profit, and things will turn sour.

And they might not even ever recognize why it happened, because they believe they want this.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Kara@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Yeah, it is very possible for us to not let Meta win. Acting like the Fediverse is doomed isn't productive at all.

[–] QHC@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago

It's not even that, just change your perspective so whatever Meta is doing or not doing is irrelevant. They can't "win" if we are on a different field playing the same sport with different players and our own equipment. Even if they have better equipment and 40,000 fans to our 1,500 that doesn't mean our thing isn't happening and meeting our needs.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Kaldo@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The issue is that the fediverse is not going to present a unified front at this rate, it is already split over whether to defederate meta or not. We don't know whether the administrators of largest instances that joined the NDA talks with meta are going to defederate too.

I agree there's no reason to panic, but that doesn't mean that nothing should be done. The anti-meta-federation act or however it is called is a good step to get the community on board, as well as sharing articles like these and informing people about what is coming.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] binwiederhier@discuss.ntfy.sh 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I just read this article and what Meta is doing then triggered all the alarm bells!

This tactic even has a Wikipedia page: Embrace, extend, and extinguish

From the Wiki (quite enlightening):

The strategy's three phases are:

  • Embrace: Development of software substantially compatible with a competing product, or implementing a public standard.
  • Extend: Addition and promotion of features not supported by the competing product or part of the standard, creating interoperability problems for customers who try to use the "simple" standard.
  • Extinguish: When extensions become a de facto standard because of their dominant market share, they marginalize competitors that do not or cannot support the new extensions.
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] tangentism@beehaw.org 25 points 1 year ago

To expedite the process, Mastodon instances should just defederate from them entirely. Don't let them access that data through ActivityPub.

When Twitter had an exodus to Mastodon and a lot of new instances popped up, several were quickly defederated because they were scraping data from other instances, which made a lot of people uncomfortable.

There were also a few far right instances that spun up that were also defederated and blocked within 24 hours so the communities ability to respond to situations like this is very much there and I'm sure that the vast majority will not want to have a single thing to do with meta

[–] Ninth3891@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago

@Dee_Imaginarium At this moment I am more un-relax with your insistence of telling me to relax.

@giallo

[–] anvit@mstdn.social 7 points 1 year ago (8 children)

@Dee_Imaginarium @giallo I wish most Mastodon instances were planning to defederate from Meta by default but sadly that's not the case. Meta reached out to the admins of some of the big instances and a whole bunch of them don't plan to. One of the admins shared this — https://fosstodon.org/@kev/110592625692688836

Some admins are going for a "trust but verify" approach. These are the only instances which have agreed to defederate from the start —https://fedipact.online/

[–] fuser@quex.cc 8 points 1 year ago

why does their conversation have to be "off the record" with an NDA when they are discussing a public federation? They will never get the idea of public social media because they can't understand the point of anything except squeezing the last drop of revenue from their decaying monolith.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] CreativeTensors@beehaw.org 54 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

Importantly, posts hosted and visible on Meta's server will be subject to Facebook's content moderation rules, which means those policies will likely have a sweeping impact across the Fediverse.

Is it just me or does that sound like anything on instances hosted outside of meta's own that can be merely seen from theirs? I'm all for moderation, the stricter moderation against hate-speech is part of why I joined Beehaw. But if I'm reading that right (I hope I'm not), then it seems like they plan to call the shots on other instances as if they have any say in what everyone else does right out of the gate.

Maybe what's meant here is simply defederation of entire instances and banning of problematic users like any other instance does, ok. But it could also mean pressuring admins to enforce Meta's TOS on a case-by-case basis which feels like the start of EEE tactics.

[–] lemmyvore@feddit.nl 43 points 1 year ago

Meta is going to be treating content on any instance in any way it suits them. They're entering this as the 900 pound gorilla and expect they'll be able to throw their weight around, naturally. They'll treat all Fediverse content as "their" content and take, take, take.

There's no way to win this. The only winning move is not too play. Defederate all their instances sight unseen.

That way when they claim to be part of the Fediverse we can say "so, who are you federating with, yourself?" and we will be able to point out it's just same old Facebook with a new coat.

[–] MaggiWuerze@feddit.de 21 points 1 year ago (3 children)

How would they pressure admins? Threaten not to take their instances data and put ads on it? What leverage has Meta here?

[–] sussy_gussy@wirebase.org 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They will very soon have the largest userbase of any instance. If your instance gets blocked by Meta, your users suddenly have a fraction of the reach because no Meta people can see your posts anymore. That would put a lot of pressure on admins I imagine.

[–] LoreleiSankTheShip@lemmy.ml 40 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I doubt people who would use Meta's instance are the sort of interesting people I'm on Lemmy for.

[–] lemmyvore@feddit.nl 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If the other instances federate with Meta's you won't have a choice. Content from Meta users will be pouring in.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] tdfischer@discuss.tchncs.de 12 points 1 year ago

They could threaten to defederate from them.

Wait a minute....

[–] CreativeTensors@beehaw.org 11 points 1 year ago

I was thinking the absolute worst case scenario is a bad faith use of the regulatory laws aimed at Meta but put on a firehose and aimed at federated servers who don't prostrate before them.

Things like partnering with copyright holders for automated DMCA floods for literally all images on the instance that have copyrighted content visible.

[–] Kichae@kbin.social 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It just means they'll block users who don't abide by local site rules, which is standard practice.

Remote content is viewed locally, via mirroring, so in order for local users to see that remote content it had to be hosted on the local site. If that content does not meet local community standards, it gets removed, and the poster gets blocked.

This absolutely puts pressure on other admins to adhere to Meta's standards, because if they don't then they'll risk being defederate, but that's the whole history and controversy of Fediblock in a nutshell.

Meta won't have control over what users on other instances post. Instead, they'll just have very strong influence over the rules on instances that desperately want to federate with senpai Meta.

[–] Kleinbonum@feddit.de 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Strong echoes of Microsoft's "embrace, extend, and extinguish" strategy...

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Paciphae@beehaw.org 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In a worst case scenario this could gut everything. I've had several 30 day facebook bans for morbid funny memes, like the classic with Dahmer asking, "Are you hungry? I've got Ben and Jerry in the freezer".

Nearly everything I find on imgur that I'd want to share with my few old friends on Facebook is either too dark/morbid or would be copyright claimed. Practically everything I find funny, the mods there think is "glorifying violence". It's ridiculous.

[–] lazynooblet@lazysoci.al 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's disgusting. Morbid and dark memes. Please share.

[–] Paciphae@beehaw.org 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] BedSharkPal@kbin.social 42 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I hate everything about this. I came here to escape the Corporations damnit!

[–] fisco@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 year ago

Same here....but now trying to infiltrate this space, which should be blocked, IMO

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 41 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Why is noone talking about GDPR data deletion request and copyright striking them into oblivion?

Last I checked noone gave them permission to grab any of our data, much less profit off it. Let them pay fines to the grave.

[–] zenithseeker 17 points 1 year ago (10 children)

By that logic though all of Fediverse is illegal and should be shut down. There is significant work to be done there, not just by Facebook but by the Fediverse community on the whole.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] tojikomori@kbin.social 28 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The Verge article is paywalled for me, but the screencaps Alex shared in his toot don't really support his summary. The article mentions that Threads can import content from Mastodon as an example of the sorts of things ActivityPub supports, and that's about as close as it gets.

And then there's this:

The company is planning to create a roundtable for administrators of other servers and developers to share best practices and work through problems that will inevitably arise, like Meta's server traffic putting strain on other, smaller servers.

Emphasis mine. How would Meta's server put strain on other, smaller servers if it's not federating with them?

I'm fully willing to believe Meta wants to EEE ActivityPub, but this particular claim doesn't seem to check out.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] UngodlyAudrey@beehaw.org 25 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So basically they're just going to be a leech. Blech.

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 year ago

Eventually it will be "embrace, extend, extinguish".

[–] biscuitsofdoom@beehaw.org 22 points 1 year ago

I'm only thinking how meta can scrape analytics.

[–] xtremeownage@lemmyonline.com 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hunh. ya know- I wouldn't be surprised if many of those "bot accounts" are infact, from meta, planning a takeover of everything here.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] miracleorange@beehaw.org 18 points 1 year ago

I don't know why everyone's all doom and gloom right now. Yes, this is a massive issue, but they're not even federating right off the bat, just allowing accounts to be imported. Who's to say Threads will even take off? While they may take a bunch of new users, I can't see a ton of people currently using Fedi services switching to Facebook (I refuse to call them Meta).

Yes, we need to be on our guards, but don't forfeit the battle before it even begins.

[–] MisterD@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 year ago

Every instance and user should block meta's shit ASAP!

[–] PascalSausage@beehaw.org 15 points 1 year ago

Anyone operating an instance should defederate from this shit immediately. This is exactly the kind of corporate overreach that isn’t welcome here. This will end very poorly for the fediverse I think.

[–] Rottcodd@kbin.social 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So... let me see if I've got this right: Meta is going to start a Twitter-like instance on the fediverse that will be marketed to Instagram members and will be subject to Facebook's content moderation rules, and Mastodon users who want to will be able to transfer their accounts to Meta's instance, in which case they will be subject to Facebook's content rules.

I keep trying to see what all of the fuss is about, but no matter how often I look at it or from how many different angles, all I see is Meta and Zuckerberg doing yet another faceplant.

It's as if Walmart announced that they were going to open a chain of art house cinemas and market them to Walmart customers.

[–] arquebus_x@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They’re going to try to pull a Microsoft: embrace, extend, extinguish.

[–] Rottcodd@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah... you know, I've seen this EEE thing so many times in the last couple of days that it's starting to feel like astroturf.

Here's a funny thing - I was actually on Voat when it came apart and I watched it happen, and what happened there is, I think, very much relevant.

It wasn't always a toxic right-wing cesspool - it was actually quite a bit like this in the early days - just people posting.

But then there was this sudden push to get people all wound up about an external threat - in that case, Reddit "powermods," and especially the SRS brigaders. The hue and cry was that they were going to destroy the free and open forum unless we did something about it.

Sort of like how Meta is going to destroy this free and open forum unless we do something about it.

But the thing is that the constant fanning of the flames just led to increasing paranoia and hysteria and infighting and harassment and brigading and general ugliness, and when the dust all settled, the toxic right-wing authoritarians had shouted down, alienated, stifled and ultimately driven away everyone else. All in the name of "protecting" the site.

Not saying that that will necessarily happen here (especially in that particular way, since if nothing else the tankies aren't going to give in to the righties). Just saying that I've already seen a forum destroyed by an obsessive fear of some bogeyman, and I'd rather not see it again.

[–] Jo@readit.buzz 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Voat died because it was landed with a big chunk of the toxicity ejected from reddit. This isn't the same thing at all.

The risk to the Fediverse from huge commercial players is described well here: How to Kill a Decentralised Network (such as the Fediverse)

In 2013, Google realised that most XMPP interactions were between Google Talk users anyway. They didn’t care about respecting a protocol they were not 100% in control. So they pulled the plug and announced they would not be federated anymore. And started a long quest to create a messenger, starting with Hangout (which was followed by Allo, Duo. I lost count after that).

As expected, no Google user bated an eye. In fact, none of them realised. At worst, some of their contacts became offline. That was all. But for the XMPP federation, it was like the majority of users suddenly disappeared. Even XMPP die hard fanatics, like your servitor, had to create Google accounts to keep contact with friends. Remember: for them, we were simply offline. It was our fault.

And it's not an accident:

What Google did to XMPP was not new. In fact, in 1998, Microsoft engineer Vinod Vallopllil explicitly wrote a text titled "Blunting OSS attacks" where he suggested to "de-commoditize protocols & applications […]. By extending these protocols and developing new protocols, we can deny OSS project’s entry into the market."

Microsoft put that theory in practice with the release of Windows 2000 which offered support for the Kerberos security protocol. But that protocol was extended. The specifications of those extensions could be freely downloaded but required to accept a license which forbid you to implement those extensions. As soon as you clicked "OK", you could not work on any open source version of Kerberos. The goal was explicitly to kill any competing networking project such as Samba.

This anecdote was told Glyn Moody in his book "Rebel Code" and demonstrates that killing open source and decentralised projects are really conscious objectives. It never happens randomly and is never caused by bad luck.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] millions@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The fediverse is gonna be like 2 servers that act like they care about privacy in a few years

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] KeavesSharpi@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 year ago

I'm shocked! SHOCKED! Meta isn't playing on an equal playing field? There's no way I could have ever seen that coming!

[–] radialmonster@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

If this fediverse thing works like its advertised to, whatever meta does won't have any effect on the rest of the network

[–] Jo@readit.buzz 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

As expected, no Google user bated an eye. In fact, none of them realised. At worst, some of their contacts became offline. That was all. But for the XMPP federation, it was like the majority of users suddenly disappeared. Even XMPP die hard fanatics, like your servitor, had to create Google accounts to keep contact with friends. Remember: for them, we were simply offline. It was our fault.

How to Kill a Decentralised Network (such as the Fediverse)

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] KeavesSharpi@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago

That didn't take long. Welp, the fediverse was a good idea. We are in the darkest timeline.

load more comments
view more: next ›