Nah, the Fediverse is based on freedom of association while most people live in countries they were born in and leaving one is really hard in most cases. Not to mention that ‘self-hosting’ a state just for yourself would be considered an extremism by existing states.
The Fediverse is clearly a libertarian idea.
an even better thing would be to put more emphasis on user controlled blocks.
And force your instance maintainers to deal with the amount of bigoted content they won’t be able to moderate? There’s already a huge amount of stuff any other instance would be blocked with no hesitation.
Reminds me of this comment by one of the Lemmy devs: https://lemmy.ml/comment/6744852
Technology won’t save us if we allow unethical companies to mess with us.
Alt-right troll instance.
Exploding Heads gave up on Lemmy a few months ago.
YAY! Great news c:
Isn’t the entire point of federation to remove closed spaces?
Not necessary. Your instance still can just not federate with anyone.
By blocking Threads, it basically means that the sole interaction many people will have with the fediverse is that it’s a closed ecosystem
Yes, and by not blocking Threads we let it to become a de-facto standard way to consume content on the Fediverse. If users want to avoid closed ecosystems, they can just create an acc on one of many mastodon or lemmy instances.
If your fear is that Meta will control the fediverse, then you’ve built a closed ecosystem that’s essentially no different to Reddit.
Blocking a single bad actor = being fully centralised. Again, create an account on the instances that don’t feed on your data and mental wellbeing.
You don’t have privacy in public, that’s the difference between public and private. If meta wanted to they could scrape the entirety of the fediverse every weekend without anyone being federated with an instance of theirs. So that isnt a good reason for defederating.
I literally said that: “There’s this weird argument that our data is public so privacy violation is okay.”
It doesn’t matter if it’s public, they use their server for data mining and we can prevent that. Someone may collect our data secretely but it doesn’t make more open approach to data mining any better or more ethical.
given that it can be done at any point I dont see any reason to do it pre-emptively rather than take a wait and see approach.
The longer users on your instance interact with content on Threads, the harder it will be to defederate (people will get angy about losing their content and their reach).
Meta is worse than gatekeeping.
Following your logic we must federate with every CP and right-wing instance. Abusive parents would love your logic. “But we’re your parents you’re supposed to love us!”
How will they force their unethical business model on you?
Their ToS (another user already sent a link to it) says they will collect data of anyone interacting with users on their service.
There’s this weird argument that our data is public so privacy violation is okay. But, even if it’s technically possible to collect and analyze data of fedizens doesn’t mean it’s okay to do. If it would become known that some of the existing instances do this they will be immediately defederated by everyone. But of course it’s different for Meta because they’re such a nice company!
This function only blocks communities from an instance. You will still see posts and comments from these people on other communities. (And Threads users have no way to create a community on Lemmy.)
Fediverse will never get a sensible percentage of people
If Fediverse will reach a “sensible amounts of people” by sacrificing all of its goals (no ads, no data harvesting), what’s the point of it? You can already register an acc on threads and enjoy full Meta experience.
everything new gets blocked
Meta isn’t ‘everything new’. It’s ‘just’ an awful company with unethical business model.
for no reason
Seems more like you dismiss any reasoning against federation as ‘it’s all paranoia’.
If they don’t care about Fediverse they wouldn’t join it in the first place. It isn’t just meaningless but actually harmful - people can gain access to the content on their service without being subject to their extensive surveillance and ads. Add to this all the regular problems with federation.
As for Google and XMPP, back in the days it was happening Google were playing good guys - they had infamous “don’t be evil” motto, supported various open standards and open-source projects (they still do so to some extend of course). I think for them it wasn’t really an intent to ‘kill’ XMPP, it just XMPP was too dependant on google so they suffered a lot when the company decided to stop federation.
100 millions users of Threads against ~1.5M users of the whole Fedi. It won’t be a toxic relationship for sure.
Lots of them actually
How do you define if a communication protocol is dead? I use XMPP everyday, it works just well.
As a result, XMPP became worse off than it started and got practically forgotten by all but 1,5 nerds who keep it alive.
Is it even true? I doubt XMPP was ever popular outside of google’s talk.
“Yeah, just block every bigot in existance and you will achieve a somewhat good experience”
Spammers also exist, and they can go long ways to avoid blocking by e.g. creating many accounts. There are people out there who could do this just to troll and harass a single user. If you’re fine with blocking every piece of shit there are - good for you. But it doesn’t mean it should be a norm.