New: Why is Meta adding fediverse interoperability to Threads?
-
GunChleocreplied to crossgolf_rebel - kostenlose Kwalitätsposts last edited by
@crossgolf_rebel @fediversereport This definitely smells of #fediwashing
-
@fediversereport I go further in my speculation. I think the opt-in requirement for Threads federation stands out as a signal of where Meta is going. I can't find the quote, but Mosseri has said that the opt-in requirement is to protect their users' privacy, security, and IP rights and defend against spam and abuse.
I call bullshit. Meta has always been crap (intentionally and unintentionally) at those things, even on their own fully-controlled platforms.
-
@fediversereport my belief is that the opt-in requirement is so that Meta can use their policy clout to ensure that we end up with a "closed open" regulatory regime like the phone networks: you *can* federate, and the system is "open" but so highly regulated "for safety" that only large corporations can even imagine doing so, and in practice the whole thing is run by duopolies or pseudo-cartels (e.g. in the US: Verizon, T-Mobile, AT&T).
This would suit Meta just fine.
-
@fediversereport their opt-in requirement is so obviously bogus – if it were something that Meta's lawyers would insist on, then SMTP should also be subject to opt-in policies (sadly, in practice it almost is these days).
It will be a devastating outcome if online decentralization becomes subject to onerous federal / european-level regulatory baseline requirements in order to enter the market. I hope that the regulators see past this attempt at regulatory capture.
cc @pluralistic
-
(on the flipside, I hope that Meta is actually pursuing these things in an honourable way, and just taking a cautious approach to user safety – something they absolutely should do! The line gets crossed if they use their power to force (implicitly or explicitly) everyone else to behave in a way that is primarily beneficial to Meta. cc @evan)
-
@blaine thanks for cc'ing me. I agree; I think opt-in federation is excessively cautious. Just from my experience, though, they seem to be really aware of the large number of small servers out there, and they're using denylist federation, so at least for now I don't think they are going for a small consortium of implementers.
-
David Somersreplied to crossgolf_rebel - kostenlose Kwalitätsposts last edited by
@crossgolf_rebel @fediversereport What do you do when you see how GDPR has driven worldwide regulation, and you see DMA and DSA on the horizon? This time it seems like they're trying to get ahead and show what team players they and avoid being regulated. It goes without saying, that compliance with GDPR has been a bit of a show (Schrems i, Schrems ii, ...)
-
@fediversereport This was excellent reporting and insightful analysis.
-
@Jeremiah @fediversereport aww thank you!
-
One reason I can think of is gathering input for machine learning which is not complete mainstream and mediocre.
I’m far from elitism, but in general I find that most toots have more value and relevance than the (dis)information flow on other platforms. -
@GunChleoc @crossgolf_rebel - kostenlose Kwalitätsposts It definitely is. Whether Meta like it or not.
Facebook may be "the Internet" for the entire Third World, but Meta need the European market. Desperately. And be it out of fear that the Facebook and Instagram killers may come out of Europe where people can no longer use "the real deal" after they were banned from the EU.
I dare say that Meta aren't a bunch of dumb jingoists who can barely grasp the idea of Europe having electricity. I'm pretty sure they know about the pile of social networks that were launched in Germany alone. I'm not even talking about Mastodon and Pleroma. I'm talking about StudiVZ/MeinVZ, Wer-kennt-wen and StayFriends, just to name the formerly biggest three. In fact, when Facebook was new, it had a hard time entering the German market because its entire potential target audience was on StudiVZ or MeinVZ and/or Wer-kennt-wen already.
So if Meta Platforms were banned from the EU market in its entirety, chances wouldn't be bad that someone whips up replacements.
And Meta know pretty well that this wouldn't even be necessary. There are already alternatives for everything the offer, even free, open-source, decentralised ones in all cases, and Meta know about at least some of them. They've known Friendica since at least 2012, for example. If Meta were forced to leave the EU, some of these alternatives would grow huge enough to have the chance to become serious competition to Meta outside the EU.
And so they're connecting Threads to the Fediverse just barely enough for the EU to shut up and leave them alone. I mean, why don't they go all-in instead if they're allegedly so eager to get their filthy hands on the Fediverse?
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #MetaPlatforms #Facebook #Instagram #WhatsApp #Threads #Horizonworlds #Horizons #EU #EuropeanUnion
