âI know thereâs a ton of skepticism about Meta entering the fediverse â itâs completely understandable,â Cottle says. âI do want to kind of make a plea that I think everyone on the team has really good intentions. We really want to be a good member of the community and give people the ability to experience what the fediverse is.â
If I wanted Facebook shitposts and forwards from KlanMa, I'd've joined Facebook. And I don't believe Meta has good intentions, I believe they want to overwhelm the fediverse, and I believe they want to make money. Middle-manager Cottle and their team may have good intentions, but corporate certainly doesn't, and I certainly don't trust their users.
My instance will most definitely not be federating with this. Itâs Meta. Untrustworthy to the core. I didnât spin up my own Lemmy server and pay out of pocket monthly just to loop bullshit social media companies back into it.
My concern with this (and other attempts like it) is that the initial integration will of course be done with good intentions by a team who shares the values of the community. And then they will get promotions or move to other jobs within two years and leave the technology to whims of revenue-generating part of the organization who will be merciless with it.
In terms of damage to the community, it'll be impossible to talk to the people you want to with ten thousand spamming robots separating you.
On one hand, it makes sense for Threads to enable Fediverse integration only on public profiles, technically. With a Threads-only private profile, they can ensure that if you want to delete stuff in your profile or even your profile altogether, this can be deleted for good.
On the other hand, for people like me, it makes me unable to get in touch with my close ones who might choose to keep their profile on private. If they'd like to keep using the Fediverse in the future, they would have to choose between this or switching their profile view to public, and some people would dislike that.
This just makes Threads a poor choice for joining the Fediverse.
With all the hate towards Facebook, my prediction is there will be two fediverses: one that federates with Facebook and the other that doesn't. We'll see how that plays out.
I feel like its worth pointing out other Mastodon users can block an entire ActivityPub domain if they want. This could be a problem, but you have a great deal of control in how much reach Threads has on your account and instance.
I have accounts on both Threads and Mastodon and will keep using both.
This will probably be enough for me to convince my organisation to quit Twitter and spin up their own Mastodon instance if Incan te them that they will be able to reach Threads users
đ¤ I'm a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:
Click here to see the summary
During the FediForum conference on Tuesday, Metaâs Peter Cottle showed off a brief demo of how users will eventually be able to connect their accounts and posts to the fediverse.
As you can see in the video below, which FediForum shared with The Verge, Cottle can navigate to his Threads account settings and toggle on an option called âfediverse sharing.â Meta will then show a pop-up explaining what exactly the fediverse is, along with some disclaimers Meta will flag to users so they know what theyâre getting into.
First, Meta notes that users will need to have a public profile to toggle on the feature, something Instagram head Adam Mosseri has already mentioned.
In other words, your post may still be visible on, say, a linked Mastodon server, even if you decide to delete it with Threads.
âI think this is a downside of the protocol that we use today, but I think itâs important to let people know that if you post something and another server grabs a copy, we canât necessarily enforce it,â Cottle says.
The FediForum is an online event that gives developers the opportunity to show off what theyâre working on in the fediverse.