Jerry Bell :verified_paw: :donor: :verified_dragon: :rebelverified:​ (@jerry@infosec.exchange)
infosec.exchange
I continue to be squeezed by both sides of the threads situation. I am operating on the premise that people who think I’m a terrible person and this is a terrible instance for allowing any interaction with threads have left and/or blocked, those remaining seem to want to either have nothing to do with threads at all and are mainly concerned with their data, and those who want to seamlessly interact with threads. I have threads limited/silenced on Infosec.exchange, but that isn’t seamless, and it’s also not fully blocking. So, here’s my proposal: I remove the limit from threads, and run a job to domain block threads for each account. Any account who chooses can undo the block (or ask me to do it) and then they can seamlessly interact with threads, and those who want nothing to do with them get their way. Thoughts?

I continue to be squeezed by both sides of the threads situation. I am operating on the premise that people who think I’m a terrible person and this is a terrible instance for allowing any interaction with threads have left and/or blocked, those remaining seem to want to either have nothing to do with threads at all and are mainly concerned with their data, and those who want to seamlessly interact with threads. I have threads limited/silenced on Infosec.exchange, but that isn’t seamless, and it’s also not fully blocking. So, here’s my proposal: I remove the limit from threads, and run a job to domain block threads for each account. Any account who chooses can undo the block (or ask me to do it) and then they can seamlessly interact with threads, and those who want nothing to do with them get their way.

[…]

(Note: this was only intended for Infosec.exchange/.town, and fedia.social)

– @jerry@infosec.exchange

  • Killercat103@infosec.pub
    121·
    11 months ago

    Sounds like a decent approach. Private by default but without taking away the freedom to interact with threads if so desired. At worst an inconvenience

  • poVoq@slrpnk.net
    128·
    11 months ago

    And Meta is laughing all the way to the bank.

    Individual blocking means nothing, it just hides the accounts and politely asks the remote server to not allow any responses.

    Only defederation really makes the server stop sharing data and only that has a decent chance to convince the Meta lawyers that maybe copyright prevents them from gobbling up everything and feed it to their advertisement algorithms and train their AIs on it.

    • JoBo@feddit.uk
      51·
      11 months ago

      That just forces everyone who wants/needs the bigger ecosystem to leave Mastodon and join Threads. It’s daft.

      The beauty of the Fediverse is that different instances can make different choices and people can choose their instance based on the choices they prefer. The Fediverse is not a monolith and demanding that it become one is just wildly missing the point.