BIG NEWS: Pawoo.net, the world's 2nd biggest Mastodon instance, has just been acquired.

The entity acquiring them is the Mask Group, a business that also runs mstdn.jp and mastodon.cloud. They are also active in the so-called "Web 3.0" space.

If you haven't heard of pawoo.net, it's because many instances have de-federated from it.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/mask-network-acquires-pawoo-net-070000858.html

Yahooist Teil der Yahoo Markenfamilie

Like it or not, it should no longer be assumed that "volunteers" are running your instances.

The Mask Group, which now runs three large instances "has raised over US$50 million from private and institutional backers"—their words not mine.

There's going to be a massive land grab of all these big instances. There will be lots of merging and acquiring too.

My advice is that you all become *very* aware of who owns your instance and why.

Get to know your admins—make sure their values align with your own.

If you don't want to put your social media life in the hands of strangers, then self-host your own instance.

To everyone using mastodon.cloud and mstdn.jp: remember, you're not locked into those instances.

If you want, you can migrate elsewhere.

This is not Twitter—you have a choice regarding where your home will be on the Fediverse.

A warning: there's going to be a concerted effort to re-centralize the Fediverse.

As we've just seen with the acquisition of pawoo.net, that's already happening.

What are you going to do to thwart this trend?

@atomicpoet Does it matter? If the underlying protocols are architected for federation and easy migration then any instances that go bad won't last long.
I do see a model like SMTP e-mail becoming a thing where technically anyone can federate, but it becomes increasingly hard for non well-resourced players to provide the necessary abuse management to play effectively.

@rob The instances that have gone bad have lasted for a very long time.

Technology does not replace human moderation.

@atomicpoet If the actions of the operators cause users any problems then they are two button presses away from migrating to another instance. The Musk problem couldn't arise here, provided acquirers don't do deeply evil things like defeating the migration mechanism. Someone *will* try it and the community response will define how the ecosystem eventually goes.

@rob @atomicpoet That's a very naive stance. If you think bad things can't happen here, you probably wont be careful or vigilat and then they WILL happen.

Those "two button presses" can just be disabled. The instance can do stuff to attract many users and then just change the protocol step by step.

It's not the first time that would happen. And ignoring that threat won't just make it go away.

@Glatorius @atomicpoet I don't believe it is naive at all. The proof point of a functional ecosystem is that it will develop a diverse range of funding options for operators from: "gift to the community", through "Mastodon blue", through to Fb style "we sell all your data". Maybe some innovative stuff involving micropayments to post/read as well, and the web 3.0 folks have something useful to contribute here.

It is practically a certainty in my mind that some instance somewhere will disable aliasing to prevent migrations away when they perceive that is in their narrow short term commercial interests.

There are also, as others have said embrace/extend/extinguish vulnerabilities inherent in any any open protocol.

How other instance operators respond to these things will define how things go long term.