What's Meta up to?

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/9799372

What’s Meta up to?

  1. Embrace ActivityPub, , Mastodon, and the fediverse

  2. Extend ActivityPub, Mastodon, and the fediverse with a very-usable app that provides additional functionality (initially the ability to follow everybody you’re following on Instagram, and to communicate with all Threads users) that isn’t available to the rest of the fediverse – as well over time providing additional services and introducing incompatibilities and non-standard improvements to the protocol

  3. Exploit ActivityPub, Mastodon, and the fediverse by utilizing them for profit – and also using them selfishly for Meta’s own ends

Since the fediverse is so much smaller than Threads, the most obvious ways of exploiting it – such as stealing market share by getting people currently in the fediverse to move to Threads – aren’t going to work. But exploitation is one of Meta’s core competences, and once you start to look at it with that lens, it’s easy to see some of the ways even their initial announcement and tiny first steps are exploiting the fediverse: making Threads feel like a more compelling platform, and reshaping regulation. Longer term, it’s a great opportunity for Meta to explore – and maybe invest in – shifting their business model to decentralized surveillance capitalism.

  • bogdugg@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    0·
    10 months ago

    I am optimistic about Meta’s investment in the Fediverse. If you don’t believe the Fediverse can survive the embrace of big tech, I don’t think you believe in it at all. You don’t want an open web, you just want to be the one in control. The goal of a decentralized internet - in my opinion - is to separate content from service. And if you believe that is the future, then you have to accept that companies are going to build new services that will try to monetize that content. But the beauty of that paradigm is you get to choose the service that works best for you without sacrificing access to the people or media you’re interested in. And really, it’s not much different from say, Google, being able to monetize Chrome because it can access your website. I mean… yeah, but that’s kind of the point?

    • BiggestBulb@kbin.social
      0·
      10 months ago

      I just want to say I completely agree with you. If we want to withstand the companies at the helm of the Internet right now, we have to make it impossible for them to extinguish us. I think that’s what we’ve essentially done with ActivityPub, and frankly I don’t see any way they can try to take us down by normal means.

      I mean, what are they gonna do? Pull the VERY loyal people from kbin.social or Lemmy.world into Threads? Or the people from Mastodon?

      It’s safe to say the people who have been here 5 months (or even more!) are not really keen on using Facebook 2.0, and we aren’t really the demographic they’re targeting. We also aren’t exactly the biggest demographic, with the Fediverse being a couple million people afaik.

      I think if anything we have the most to GAIN from federation. People will know about our little public ad-free corner of the Internet. It’s downright silly to throw up pitchforks just because “Meta bad” because - at the end of the day - HOW will they destroy the Fediverse?

      • Sl00k@programming.dev
        0·
        10 months ago

        with the Fediverse being a couple million people

        Yes thank you as I never see this being mentioned around here. I believe the last monthly active users was 300k? While it’s not nothing, meta doesn’t give any shit about a one time acquisition of 300k users who don’t want to use their platform.

        We aren’t even “worth” extinguishing right now. These decisions are being made at a level far above us. We just don’t know why yet. I’m expecting them to use ActivityPub as a tie in for Threads/Insta/FB.

        • enkers@sh.itjust.works
          01·
          10 months ago

          We just don’t know why yet.

          Because an open, federated network is an existential threat to them if it ever reaches mainstream popularity.

  • Yerbouti@lemmy.ml
    0·
    10 months ago

    If the plan for the fedivers is to associate with Meta, I will leave it in a heart beat.

  • LoveSausage@lemmy.ml
    11·
    10 months ago

    As i suggested from the start. Defederate any instance that federate with threads. Yea I’m being Trotsky here, split can be a good thing.

  • masterspace@lemmy.caEnglish
    01·
    10 months ago

    Extend ActivityPub, Mastodon, and the fediverse with a very-usable app that provides additional functionality (initially the ability to follow everybody you’re following on Instagram, and to communicate with all Threads users) that isn’t available to the rest of the fediverse

    That’s already available to Threads users regardless of whether or not they federate.

    as well over time providing additional services and introducing incompatibilities and non-standard improvements to the protocol

    kk, then defederate from them when that happens.

    Exploit ActivityPub, Mastodon, and the fediverse by utilizing them for profit – and also using them selfishly for Meta’s own ends

    This is a nonsense sentence that says nothing and makes no actual tangible point.

    This is nothing but more hysteria.

    • 1984@lemmy.today
      0·
      10 months ago

      So many people with no experience of big tech taking over and killing things. You know some of us are older than 20 right? We have seen this many times before. Maybe listen instead of speak and you may learn something.

      • BaldProphet@kbin.social
        01·
        10 months ago

        Oh, believe me, I do listen, and I learn about things that I use on a regular basis. Based on my understanding of the ActivityPub protocol, I sincerely believe that concerns about Threads are exaggerated. It’s very cult-like, with talk of “pacts” and tendencies towards prophecy and a “purity” mentality.