Kev Quirk (@kev@fosstodon.org)
fosstodon.org
Attached: 1 image Yeah, that's gonna be a hard pass from me thanks, Rachel. Zero interest in having a conversation with #Meta "off the record" or otherwise. Sharing this purely to be as transparent as possible with our members.

The exchange is about Meta’s upcoming ActivityPub-enabled network Threads. Meta is calling for a meeting, his response is priceless!

  • ZeldaKnK@lemmy.ninja
    4·
    1 year ago

    Here’s the rundown:

    1. Meta joins fediverse
    2. Meta introduces convenient, cool and innovative features not originally on fediverse code
    3. Everyone wants new features, but features are locked under propietary code.
    4. Everyone flocks to meta’s instance.
    5. Meta is now the fediverse and the fediverse is nothing but a husk of its former self
    • rbits@lemmy.fmhy.ml
      0·
      1 year ago

      What? Defederating doesn’t fix that.

      1. Meta doesn’t join the fediverse
      2. Meta introduces convenient, cool and innovative features not originally on fediverse code
      3. Everyone wants new features, but features are locked under propietary code.
      4. Everyone flocks to meta’s product.
      5. Meta is now the fediverse and the fediverse is nothing but a husk of its former self

      The solution is 1: to make sure users understand that it’s a bad idea to flock to meta’s instance, and 2: to implement that feature in the fediverse if everyone likes it so much they’re willing to leave. The solution is not defederating now because of the posibbilty that they do that in the future.

      • ZeldaKnK@lemmy.ninja
        1·
        1 year ago

        But meta cannot claim all the fediverse as accesible content. Therefore making it akin to using facebook and reddit. Separate services that serve different demographics