Gruber says: "...the idea that administrators of Mastodon/Fediverse instances should pledge to preemptively block Facebook’s imminent Twitter-like ActivityPub service (purportedly named Threads) strikes me as petty and deliberately insular. ... to me this feels like convicting Facebook of a pre-crime."

To me, this take feels obtuse to the point of intention - or at least self-parody. Smells a bit like the whole "paradox of tolerance" folks like to shop around in debates.

Surely you can't possibly be unaware that Meta (née Facebook) already has a rich history of acting badly, that many folks switched to alternatives like Mastodon as a response to that, and many now express wariness & outright revulsion to that same bad actor wandering into a new party?

My dear sweet summer child, don't be a doofus.

https://daringfireball.net/linked/2023/06/19/not-that-kind-of-open

Not That Kind of ‘Open’

Link to: https://fedipact.online/

Daring Fireball

"The whole point of ActivityPub as an open protocol is to turn Twitter/Instagram-like social networking into something more akin to email: truly open."

The point of an open protocol is to help folks build what they want to build. Not an obligation to welcome everyone into their house.

If I have a full beer keg and you have a tap that fits it, that doesn't necessarily mean you're invited to my barbecue.

@lmorchard

"Sure, they've gotten drunk and trashed the place at every single party they've been invited to in living memory, but that doesn't mean they'll do it at *ours*."

@lmorchard "into something more akin to email: truly open."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xLW-1c836k
I Don't Like Spam!

YouTube

@lmorchard are we forgetting about MetaFacebooks past crimes though? Don't accuse me of condemning them for future crimes, they have plenty of shit in the past to condemn them from.

How strict will their adherence to the ActivityPub protocol be? Will they bastardise their own?

What about their real name policies, why were they so strict about it before, and how will they deal with it now?

Will they comply with post archival and deletion policies ie. Let me be forgotten. Or will be be feeding their next AI language model and profiled endlessly? Last I checked they made it damn near impossible to delete your own data en masse.

Also, are they paying tax yet?

@lmorchard
IMO the Fediverse is not an open federation, and it can never be one.
It's interconnected, sure, but each interconnection is subject to admins' politics, similar to BGP peerings or interconnects between telcos.

And the reason this happens is twofold:
- instances aren't content-neutral, their admins do moderation
- the protocol trusts remote instances in certain aspects, it doesn't guarantee the security properties people expect

1/

@lmorchard
It's a choice, perhaps not fully intentional, but a choice Fedi has collectively made, and it's an OK choice.

But saying that the Fediverse is an "open federation" while the reality is you have to be careful who you federate with is just incorrect.

@lmorchard TL:DR; Gruber being a prick, again. Film at 11.
@sindarina @lmorchard he sounds like the person who was responsible for all the shitty parts of markdown, "oh no one's going to use *that*"
@lmorchard sure, that guy has burned down half the houses in his old neighborhood, but let’s not worry about him moving into ours
@lmorchard didn't they work at FB early on?

@lmorchard I think that individuals can block instances, correct? So that those instances can't slurp down those individuals' content and so that meta's instance is not visible on those users' timelines? That's what I want to do.

Let everyone else make their own decisions - I don't want to decide for them. I =do= want to decide for me.

@thelaughingmuse Sure, but also some folks join instances that offer certain moderation promises. So. the folks hosting those instances do make decisions for everyone on the instance (ideally) in accordance with those promises. That way, it doesn't have to be a constant repeated individual decision.

In fact, you should choose include that in what leads you to hang out on some particular instance.

@lmorchard I realize that; but I've had to migrate instances twice already since I got here, and I'd like to wait a bit until I do it again. (I don't know if stux, the admin of the instance that I'm on, is planning or has promised to defederate meta's instances.)

It is good to remind folks what tools individuals have. Also...I don't know if I actually have those tools. I just think that I do. (Haven't investigated yet.)

@thelaughingmuse Yeah, moving sucks, I got nothing for that. I'm tired of living in interesting times, most days

@lmorchard Hard same.

Bring on the 'boring times'. I'll even settle for the 'mildly bewildering times'.

@thelaughingmuse @lmorchard user instance block doesn't do anything against scrapers, it basically just mutes posts from that instance for you

it doesn't even necessarily hide your posts from the specifically blocked instances in normal everyday use - sometimes mastodon users are surprised to find that a bunch of people using other fedi software are having a conversation in their replies without them even knowing

@thelaughingmuse @lmorchard I made my decision. I decided I wanted to join together with a group of people who place trust in the admins of my particular instance to make decisions I would like to follow, which allows us increased time-efficiency per person (removing duplicated effort) and so allowing for higher-quality, less knee-jerk decisions (because, in aggregate, more total time/energy spent making any given unique one of them).

(And if I start disagreeing with their decisions, I can decide to leave.)

And I decided to be part of a network that is technologically structured to allow me to make that decision, and that socially supports the making of that class of decisions.

@lmorchard @emmah People have already forgotten about the genocide
@CoolerPseudonym @lmorchard people just want influencers flashing their cleavage.
@CoolerPseudonym @lmorchard @emmah And the psych studies they’ve conducted while claiming that the terms of use count as informed consent, and the dictators whose social media presences they’ve helped maintain, and the fact that ol’ Zucky boy literally wants to be a modern day Roman emperor.
@lmorchard Damn, can't believe the guy who's been licking boot for Apple professionally for the past two decades has a bad take on the whole meta thing
@lmorchard my (bitter) heuristic is that anytime someone says "The whole point of X is", where X is something even slightly social in aspect, you know they're not really being serious in their analysis. because, like, what, there's *one* purpose? that everyone agrees on, do they? pull the other one it has federated bells on
@lmorchard ope wope you already said that sorry https://hackers.town/@lmorchard/110573436726909218 🙈
Les Orchard (@[email protected])

Content warning: re: mastodon meta meta; gruber takes

hackers.town
@maya @lmorchard i didn't see what this reply was to at first and thought it was about those "sex is for reproduction" people
@lmorchard He's never met a corporate cock he didn't grab hold of.

@lmorchard Be wary of centrists labeling those who would defederate as intolerant. They're either ignorant or shills.

This is how they work, by shaming those of us who guard ourselves against Facebook, so that later anyone who expresses doubt or caution is called out as an extremist.

The only choice left is to be "tolerant" with those who want to rob us and control us. That's how they win.

Replace facebook with free speech absolutists, nazis, gender criticals or men's rights activists. It's exactly the same thing.

@lmorchard who needs precrime? Facebook sticking its nose in changes the number of fediverse players that facilitated actual genocide from zero to one
@lmorchard John Gruber can go fuck himself in front of a mirror so he can be the one person to enjoy watching it.
@lmorchard Oh well, it’s good ol’ Gruber. What did you expect? The guy’s not exactly a freedom fighter, huh?