this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2023
43 points (100.0% liked)
Asklemmy
43939 readers
531 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
To paraphrase from a bank robber - Meta is where the users are. If we want open source technology to grow, we need to have users. If you block Meta out of the gate, how do you get their users to transition? IMO, energy should be spent on strategizing how to get the users to transition to open source instances, not getting people riled up to block them immediately.
I agree, so many people here quick to shut down a massive potential source of new users. Meta can 'enshittify' their own instance, but ActivityPub as a whole was designed so that no one entity can control the service.
They will datamine any instance that federates with them. They have had so many privacy issues it would be insane to give them the benefit of the doubt again. A leopard can't change its spots.. Not to mention the NSA docs & Cambridge Analytica.
They have proven themselves to be a hostile actor on the Internet.