Afaik, whenever an Activitypub instance has defederated from another it has always had to do with some combination of bad user behavior, poor moderation, and/or spam. Are the various instance admins who have decided to preemptively block threads.net simply convinced that these traits will be inevitable with it? Is it more of a symbolic move, because we all hate Meta? Or is the idea to just maintain a barrier (albeit a porous one) between us and the part of the Internet inhabited by our chuddy relatives?

(For my part, I'm working on setting up my own Lemmy and/or Pixelfed instance(s) and I do not currently intend to defederate.)

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

[–] Kichae@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They can take. That doesn't mean we need be ok with giving. Just because they're ok with theft IP doesn't mean we need to be ok with them doing it.

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What "IP theft"? By using a service built on ActivityPub you are inherently and deliberately broadcasting your posts to the public. Meta has just as much right to read those posts as I do.

[–] BNE@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago

I'd counterpoint by saying that Meta isn't a person - up its not really a apples-to-apples comparison here. They're trying to get in here to make money. Pure and simple. I'd wager we aren't - we're here hour community.

Our wants and needs are opposed, that's why I'm not comfortable with letting them commercialise/monopolise whatever they want - especially somewhere that could offer us a more healthy online experience and upset their business model long term.