So much for people saying Threads won't support Fediverse integration. I've been dogfooding the feature since before the service launched and the team has 100% been planning to support interoperability with Mastodon from day one.

Kudos to all the folks on the Threads team who've been working on this. So glad to see this test announced before the end of the year.

https://www.threads.net/@zuck/post/C0zXcQmxO77

@carnage4life A tentative “Hell yeah” to this
@carnage4life Awesome. All for more connections in the open network!

@carnage4life

Really good to hear. I was beginning to have doubts of it happening.

@carnage4life Thinking about starting a betting pool to see how long Threads manages to stay off the various community-driven instance block lists.

I'm sure there are other technical issues with Threads entering the Fediverse as a monolithically sized instance.

Can you say more about what you mean by "dogfooding"? At first blush, it sounds like you're saying that Threads is already, secretly federated.

@tob I've had access to the features in test form internally at Meta.
@tob @carnage4life personally, any instance that pre-emptively blocks Threads is an instance that I'd leave if I were on it.
Maybe it'll turn out to be horrible. But more likely it's the usual mix of good people and bad actors.
And we have the tools already to handle the badies....

@colo_lee @carnage4life I suspect that most instances will start with a wary permissiveness irt Threads (it is still Meta after all).

My question is more how will Threads handle moderation requests from the various disparate instances and their admins? e.g. What happens when Threads users inevitably dogpile a Mastodon account?

@tob @carnage4life Yes, responding to moderation reports will be very interesting to watch.

I'd rather assume most Threads users are decent people. I don't see any reason to assume apriori that they're any worse than the full-features slice of humanity we already have here. Cause there are already some pretty nasty pieces of work here. But, most people are still good.

@colo_lee @carnage4life I don't anticipate that they will be worse than the fediverse *in-toto*.

I DO expect that the Threads population will be significantly worse than the "best" instances here.

@carnage4life are we able to view zuck's profile here yet?
@amwg It doesn't seem so, yet. I just tried a search for his threads account ([email protected]) but the mastodon.social server cannot find it. Yet!
@carnage4life dogfooding it on a private instance? Or is mas.to receiving AP traffic from threads.net?
@carnage4life This really is a big step forward from Meta. Never thought we'd see this and that they'd backtrack. Kudos indeed to everyone at Meta who worked on this..
@carnage4life I think a lot of us were saying that it wouldn't federate until it could find a way to monetise. As long as that monetisation stays on their walled garden non-internet, they're welcome to. It has no place here.
@carnage4life Can you give us the details on how you connect? I can't see Webfinger or Activity Streams 2.0 content from threads.net yet.

@carnage4life This is only good.
Another protocol win.

And if Threads users turn out to be problematic, we have the tools to make them go away.

It will be interesting to see how they handle moderation reports.

@carnage4life in the sidelines, I appreciated this comment:
@carnage4life Meta has already facebookified Threads meaning your following feed doesn't show all posts from people you follow. I"m betting on bluesky.
@carnage4life You do understand why people (especially on mastodon) would not trust Meta, do you?

@spitfire

for the sake of their career's it's more convenient to ignore people's concerns and act like this is great

@big_louse I’m not saying it’s bad, just that people may have valid reasons to distrust them;)