Finally I'm getting around to listen to @mike 's Dot.Social episode with @rklambo and @pcottle from #meta, talking about #threads.

[j12t@social.coop]

Shout-out to @mike: he's asking #Meta all the good questions about federation and beyond on his dot.social podcast.

Now: do you see federation more broadly as it relates to (other parts of) Meta, like Instagram and other social products you have?

Nor surprisingly, he gets a bit of a non-answer: it's early days, we have a lot to learn, how are people reacting etc.

[j12t@social.coop]

@pcottle adds that in his view, the fediverse makes more sense for public conversations, as opposed to his example of his own Instagram profile that he has set to private.

[j12t@social.coop]

Both Rachel and Peter suggest that some moderation functionality could/should become part of the protocol stack. #AtProto does composable moderation and that is really cool. Peter hopes that #ActivityPub may learn from it and evolve in this direction.

[j12t@social.coop]

Rachel: one of the challenges with the fediverse is: how do you figure out where your content went, and how can I follow that conversation that now exists on multiple different servers?

Wants all replies in the same spot. That helps feel people in control.

This is actually a really good point imho. It's not just confusing that reply trees aren't eventually consistent across the fediverse, but it creates uncertainty because I don't even know what people say in response.

[j12t@social.coop]

Peter: one of the advantages of #ActivityPub is that you can limit exposure to other servers.

#AtProto is all public, and that's another reason why #ActivityPub is a better match for Meta.

[j12t@social.coop]

Rachel: re monitization, so far we are only focused on giving people a great experience on Threads

Going forward, they want to hear from lots of people and communities and regulators before they figure out what is acceptable and what not.

Peter: quotes a session from @fediforum where business models were discussed.

Mike: there will be many business models.

[j12t@social.coop]

Mike: "one of the original sins of the internet is that the relationship between the person and a website was not done at the protocol level. I see the fediverse with the ability to have a direct relationship as a core answer to them treating people with respect."

This is as close as a #VRM pitch as I have heard from somebody who hasn't been part of the VRM community! https://cyber.harvard.edu/projectvrm/Main_Page

[j12t@social.coop]

Peter is thanking the community working so well together and help debug bugs live!

"We are all on team fediverse!"

[j12t@social.coop]

Listen to the podcast yourself here: https://dot-social.simplecast.com/episodes/threads-OrGZJIHN

[julian]

@[email protected] said in Finally I'm getting around to listen to @mike 's Dot.Social episode with @rklambo and @pcottle from #meta, talking about #threads.:

Rachel: one of the challenges with the fediverse is: how do you figure out where your content went, and how can I follow that conversation that now exists on multiple different servers?

Something ForumWG is actively researching at present. A lot of the fediverse is built on reply chains, fragmented ones, but there's a better path forward, and we're figuring out just how to do it.

You shouldn't ever have to "view original post" except out of a sense of curiosity.

[j12t@social.coop]

@julian Where are you having that conversation?

[julian]

@[email protected] follow the category here: @[email protected] (although the handle will change at some point) for latest updates and discussion

[jfrantzius@mozilla.social]

@J12t interesting, as to Meta's motivation, there was no mentioning of DSA. Of course they wouldn't term it as throwing a bone to the regulators, but not mentioning it at all leaves a slightly uncomfortable taste for me.