For the "Why are you so hostile to Threads federating?" people..

Check this out. Remember that Facebook isn't just the place where moms and aunts swap recipes:... #threads #facebook #meta #fediverse

https://kbin.social/m/fediverse/t/709341

For the "Why are you so hostile to Threads federating?" people.. - Fediverse - kbin.social

Check this out. Remember that Facebook isn't just the place where moms and aunts swap recipes:...

Why are people so horny for federating with fb/meta? If you want to see their shit just join them.
Users ≠ Company
But they are inseparable.
As in you're using the service, but that doesn't mean you two are one and make the same decisions.
But you support/validate the service by interacting with your contacts.
Let's put it this way: Just because they live under an oppressive regime doesn't mean we should be mean to them and keep them isolated in their evil bubble.

It’s not being mean to them. Calling them names or something would be mean.

And they are not oppressed. Oppressed people don’t have choices.

Say, many would agree that Han people in China are oppressed. They have a ton of middle-class citizens who are free to leave the country, they just don't want to permanently due to not thinking it'd be better.

Same applies to Threads, though maybe a stronger case for leaving.

I’m not having a conversation that compares people signing up to their favourite social media channel with people who suffer systemic discrimination every day in their lives.
Han people are the main ethnicity of China; they aren’t the Uyghurs, if that’s what you mean

I’ve seen an argument that defederation would just hurt the fediverse, and that even an exploitative giant like Meta should therefore be welcomed.

I think that’s like arguing that we should get rid of antitrust laws, which we have for good reason. We need to be able to stop bad actors and the damage they do. Especially large ones.

If a Mastodon instance was run by someone who allowed a genocide to be fuelled by their platform, and earn money from the advertising, I think we'd defederate in a heart beat. It just doesn't seem consistent to federate with them.

You are addressing a strawman.

This post doesn’t address the main “pro-federation” point that I have seen. People who are support of federation aren’t saying that Facebook is a great company, they have great morales or that they aren’t supporting ActivityPub for their own gain. I think there is very little doubt that FB is a shit organization with no morales who thinks that this is a great move to get people back to their sites.

The most common reason that I see people supportive of Threads’ federation is that they believe it will help people move off of Facebook and other proprietary platforms onto more user-friendly ones. If all of your friends use Instagram it is very hard to move to Mastodon. If you want to stay in touch you will at least need two accounts. You can move your friends but it is hard because they each need to make that switch and it affects their interaction with others, or they need to manage multiple accounts until most of their friends have switched. If your friends use Threads (and it federates) then you can switch to Mastodon with very little friction, you can still interact with all of your existing friends in more or less the same way. Similarly each friend can easily move without managing multiple accounts during the transition. If all instances have blocked threads.net many people just won’t move, they will stay with FB.

To make a good argument you need to either refute this perceived advantage or argue that it isn’t worth the downsides. Making up a strawman doesn’t convince anyone.

is facebook real dystopia now
I get what you're saying, I think most people fear that instead FB's septic tank will spill and spread in the Fediverse instead; I already had to deal with some "FREE SPEECH!" guy that wanted it to be a platform where people for example from Hamas and Israel could discuss and "agree to disagree".