this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2023
166 points (93.7% liked)

Technology

58133 readers
5145 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] teft@lemmy.world 151 points 1 year ago (6 children)
[–] Greenskye@lemmy.world 76 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yep. The Fediverse has a lot of growing room in the QOL department and is hampered by the relatively small (and often part time) dev teams working on it. Meta comes in, builds a compatible platform, then starts offering meta-platform only 'improvements' that offer those QOL features. Rest of the Fediverse dies out because 'meta' isn't that bad and they aren't abusing their position (yet).

[–] klyde@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

That's super depressing

[–] radix@lemmy.world 29 points 1 year ago (3 children)

https://blog.joinmastodon.org/2023/07/what-to-know-about-threads/

If the founder of Mastodon isn't worried about Threads, I won't be, either.

[–] eleitl@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

You absolutely should be. If Mastodon instances will start federating with Meta I will defederate them. And move my accounts from any instance that federates with them.

[–] Zorque@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

His lack of worry seems to be founded in Meta Defederating, not federating, though. Meta would do more harm by being a part of the community than by leaving a ways down the road. It seems like a particularly myopic view of possible problems with Metas move.

[–] someguy3@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago

Saved for later, but small startups/operations always know the will play second fiddle and be the smaller guy.

[–] atocci@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Microsoft literally invented the term, but even they've abandoned the philosophy and pivoted to contributing to the development of open source software. Who's to say "Meta" won't be making contributions to the development of ActivityPub itself like Microsoft does with Chromium? I won't be signing up for Threads since I already have Mastodon, but I'm also unconcerned with it joining the wider fediverse and look forward to following the people who do use it from my Mastodon account.

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

Ummm... You do know this is Meta we're talking about right?

[–] SUPERcrazy3530@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Microsoft changed and so could Meta. They’re out to make money not just to be evil so if they think this will make them money they would do it.

[–] AzureVoid@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They also won't hesitate to be evil if they think that will make them more money.

[–] SUPERcrazy3530@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

That's true but connecting to the fediverse is definitely trying to keep the government off their back about being a monopoly. Playing nice is in their best interests for now. If that ever changes they can be defederated at the point.

[–] chickenwing@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Meta makes a lot of contributions to open source. Jest and pytorch are two tools they have made open source. They have their eyes on killing Twitter and connecting to one of the biggest alternatives is a smart move, but eventually if all goes well they won't need mastadon anymore. That's the concern I think. Once threads is big enough they will quietly remove activitypub support and screw up mastadon in the process.

[–] QHC@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Microsoft could just as easily change back, too.

[–] Technomancer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 year ago

Yep, this is precisely what I thought too.

[–] ward2k@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

EEE famously doesnt work very well, Microsoft who coined the phrase even gave up on it after a number of unsuccessful attempts

I wish people would stop spamming EEE

[–] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There have been a number of times where it successfully stifled the advance of a more free or open technology. It can't necessarily "extinguish" in the sense of totally destroying a technology, but it can destroy the openness of the technological landscape. Just look at how Google has layered their crap on top of the open core of Android. Or look at how Apple has successfully gotten like a third of all iPhone users to be openly hostile to anyone who uses SMS and/or 3.5mm jacks. Or hell, look at what's going on with Reddit.

[–] SkyNTP@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I'm of the opinion that people who look down on you for not using their chosen product are just awful people to have in your life. You don't want to be interacting with that toxic behaviour anyway.

Cut them out and make it clear: they are awful, not because of the product, but because of their behaviour.

The nice thing with open source software, there is relatively little stopping you from using it.

[–] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

The nice thing with open source software, there is relatively little stopping you from using it.

Except of course if your workplace or educational institution has some restriction or imposition on the software you use. Which tends to be the result of the ubiquitous nature of proprietary software.