Meta and the Fediverse
In the case of Meta want to join the Fediverse, Equestria.Social will block Meta instance.
Here 4 links to understand why :
https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html by @ploum
https://about.scicomm.xyz/doku.php?id=blog:2023:0625_meta_on_the_fediverse_to_block_or_not_to_block
https://social.coop/@loshmi/110594900719666868
https://privacy.thenexus.today/should-the-fediverse-welcome-surveillance-capitalism/
@LittleshyFiM It's more to do with blocking meta corp from collecting data on users and other instances and selling them to data brokers and the likes for profit with disregard to privacy and possibly influencing ActivityPub tech and other instances in some ways.
Corporations tried and are stilling doing the same with linux in some ways, anyway they can i.e patent trolling.
It sucks that we'd have to block users on those instances (which is not our intention), but we're doing this specifically to protect users and our instance from meta. That's not even getting into the reputation FB has for letting misinformation and extreme ideologies go rampant.
@Shredd_Tone That's sad to hear. I can't help but think locking things down so quickly and preventing people from following what they want to follow is the very thing Mastodon sought to combat.
Seems like most of the discussion about Meta Threads is basically saying Mastodon should have a whitelist instead of a blacklist when it comes to blocking servers. I'd hate to see things go in that direction. I wish you all the best, but I'm probably gonna try out the migration feature and find a server which is more open soon.
@LittleshyFiM Well, we've always been open but we do have to block instances that are admin and modded by individuals to protect our user data bases. Google apps once blocked mastodon due to instances providing harmful content.
I.e we had to block instances that had been bully users for being bronies, which the admins didn't even care about. Plus other servers that provided child pornography, terrorism etc.
It's not a fun job, but something has to be done. If an instance is isn't taking it seriously or providing something that potentially cause harm to our users. Mastodon had been intended to stop corps profiting off data from their users. If people aren't comfortable with making nfts out of say a users artwork or song for profit, what difference would it make if they dox users for profit?
But having that said, whether you choose to go or stay, you'll always be welcome here to interact with us and I wish you all the best.
@Shredd_Tone I definitely appreciate the hard work that goes into moderation and keeping a community safe. That is certainly not what I was alluding to when I expressed desire for a more open server.
Is blocking Meta Threads a moderation matter? I thought it was more of an ideological protest. A protest which hurts the Fediverse a lot more than it hurts Meta in my opinion. They couldn't care less if we block them, but we miss out on reaching more people and helping ActivityPub break into the mainstream. Although I imagine there are moderation concerns too, most of the reasoning I've seen so far seems very vague and impractical. Even the official Mastodon blog seems optimistic about Threads. Not that they, I, or anyone already on Mastodon thinks people should have a Meta account to use it of course.
@LittleshyFiM @Shredd_Tone It's a protective measure against Meta's aggressive data harvesting, and an attempt to stop the Fediverse becoming another algorithm-driven hate-filled cesspit like Facebook.
If people wanna see that stuff, go to Facebook. If you want a social media experience that protects its users and isn't driven by corporate greed (so typically anti-LGBT, heavily right wing and so on and so forth), Meta needs to be kept out for good
C_Chell
LittleshyFiM
Shredd Tone 
interru
404compliant
Skydream tiny flapflaphorse