this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2023
229 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37734 readers
408 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CoderKat@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Agreed. I don't see the point in trying to ban something before it exists and before we even know anything about how it would work. I get it, Meta has done some shit. But on the other hand, having such a big player in the Fediverse could be huge for its growth, especially since the Fediverse has a serious UX issue and UX is Meta's strength.

I don't really understand the privacy concerns. Just don't use their instances? Have y'all seen how the Fediverse already works? Stuff like your votes are already public and that can't be easily changed. And a nifty thing is that if Meta makes a product for the Fediverse that is federated, it's just as easy for its users to migrate to another Fediverse platform if we find out Meta pulls some shit.

[–] QHC@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago

The whole point of the Fediverse is to add a human-based trust component. Why would a company that has repeatedly shown itself to not be trustworthy get the benefit of the doubt?

IMO, Meta can start their own instance and ask to be invited to the larger system, assuming they first prove to be worth taking that risk.

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

I get it, Meta has done some shit. But on the other hand, having such a big player in the Fediverse could be huge for its growth

Isn't that exactly how "embrace, extend, extinguish" works? Meta's huge numbers and publicity means that once it joins the Fediverse it will become the Fediverse, by sheer mass. Every other instance will be not even be a blip on the radar compared to theirs.

We get exactly one chance to refuse and it's here, at the start.

What is even their saving grace? Publicity? People will only see "Meta" and "Facebook" plastered everywhere. And you know they'll use their instance to archive and analyze everything, and build fake profiles, and cross-match them to Whatsapp and Facebook and Instagram, and so on and so forth.

Meta/Facebook/Zuckerberg have done some of the most vile stuff to privacy. They've preyed on the personal data of billions of people. If there was such a thing as privacy genocide they'd be guilty of it.

This is like getting into the pool with a big hungry shark with syphilis. For goodness's sake, stop to think about it for a second.