Threads is automatically hiding comments that mention Pixelfed
For anyone wondering if Threads and Facebook at large will be a fine neighbor in the space and compatible with other apps/services in the fediverse: they’re already automatically hiding comments that mention Pixelfed https://mastodon.social/@dansup/112126250737482807 [https://mastodon.social/@dansup/112126250737482807]
Oh no, it was everywhere, and I got into some decent arguments with those lovely people who ask you to show them how it’s going to have any effect on the fediverse at all, complete with citations.
WeLl hOw Do YoU KnOw?
Let’s just give them a chance guys. They haven’t done anything bad yet. It will help the fediverse grow. We need their content
wE cAn AlwAyS dEfeDeraTe lAtEr. It dEfinIteLy WoN’T bE tOo LaTe tHeN
I have to post this again sorry
People make more complex decisions when they have multiple roles:
Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but my understanding is that since LW will federate with them, any content they host, will end up on meta.
For example, this discussion we’re having right now is on [email protected]. So it doesn’t matter whether our own instances have defederated meta - our posts and comments here will bring them value. Directly, in the form of content. And indirectly, in the form of processable data for machine learning, shadow profiles, etc.
but my understanding is that since LW will federate with them, any content they host, will end up on meta
Your understanding is wrong. Instances don’t forward stuff from other instances to other instances. Instances only send their own content directly to the instances they federate with.
whatever LW does will affect all of Lemmy
Uuuh no it won’t? The fact that they federate with Threads doesn’t mean that my instance does. How does it affect me?
Migrate away from instances that embrace Meta to those that do not. Choose an instance that aligns with you.
Or in the extreme case, if you’re the first who can’t find such an instance and you’re technically inclined, there’s your room for a new instance. It’s how the fediverse works and partly why Meta is so intent on destroying it.
Unfortunately there is no explicit list, but I believe there are tools that will draw a graph of the fediverse and allow you to check that a particular instance does not. I’m not sure what the name is off the top of my head.
Naturally, if you see anything posted direct from Threads in your feed, that means your instance that you’re connected to is passing that data.
The tooltip for fedipact says: “Agreed to block all communications (their blocklist is private)”
To me that says, they’ve agreed but it’s not confirmed that they’ve gone through with it because the blocklist is private. Blocked on the other hand says “All communications are blocked”
I don’t know, but you can check individual instances by going to the /instances subdomain and searching for threads.
shjw and blahaj are defederated, world isn’t.
This can always change, but I have confidence in my admins.
Edit: Thanks to [email protected] for this link
Not sure anyone posted this in direct reply to you - fedipact.veganism.social
You can search/filter for your instance there. As an example, if you search lemmy.world you’ll see they currently do federate with meta.
I’m kind of stupid and more here just because it tends to be better discussion than Reddit: what does “federate with” mean in this context??
Thanks!
@Minotaur @henfredemars @technology You are using an account on lemm.ee to reply to someone commenting from an account on infosec.pub in a community hosted on lemmy.world.
Those are all running Lemmy software, but I am replying from an account on social.goodanser.com, which is running Mastodon software.
That's federation. We're all using different service providers, sometimes even different software, but we can talk to each other because they speak the same protocol, called ActivityPub. Threads.net has announced plans to support ActivityPub and conducted some limited trials, which they're in the process of expanding. They claim they intend to support it fully, but only for users who opt in to it.
Servers can block, or "defederate from" other servers, and many have chosen to preemptively defederate from Threads.
But it actually isn’t, because the largest driver of growth for platforms like facebook & instagram is the already present userbase.
That userbase will always be there if the programs are all federated together, so creating a new platform is now just making a better site versus that and bringing in the userbase.
And now I’m commenting from a lemmy.world account because Lemmy from Mastodon has some rough edges like the need to tag the community in my comment above to ensure it actually reaches the lemmy.world server.
Tumblr and Flickr are also talking about ActivityPub support, but it’s not clear if or when that will actually happen. It would make more sense to me for those services since they’re fairly small and it’s a way to substantially increase the possible audience. It’s not clear what Meta’s motivations are here, though a motivation some have proposed is that they’re trying to get in front of potential regulation. The EU Digital Markets Act, for example requires some services to interoperate with competitors, and having one of its new products join an established standard protocol is a way to say “you don’t need to regulate us, we already do the thing”.
I don’t think their blocking of comments mentioning Pixelfed is intentional. Pixelfed is not popular enough for Meta to care about as a competitor, and blocking mentions of competitors has never been among their tactics.
Appreciate this response, it seems to make a lot of sense to me.
I think people on sites like Lemmy and similar can kind of uhh… overestimate how much anyone outside of a very niche crowd care about the whole “federalization” movement, and yeah it seems unlikely to me that Threads is going out of its way to shadowban a niche competitor like Pixelfed
That’s exactly why Threads is incompatible with the Fediverse. Any huge server that is impossible to moderate for admins is detrimental to the network and failure to properly moderate is the number one reason we should be looking at to defederate from instances.
Automatic “spam” protection is the exact thing which co-opted e-mail. Big corps with the largest e-mail user base use algorithms that automatically assume the worst about any small e-mail server. If you spin up a small server you are assumed to be spam unless unless unless, which ended up with e-mail being centralized in the hands of Google, Microsoft, Yahoo and Apple, despite being theoretically decentralized too.
Is that what we want for the Fediverse? 4 or 5 huge instances automatically defederating from all small instances unless they fit some criteria defined by the big corps, which they can change anytime?
Nix
shortwavesurfer
breadsmasher
Sanctus
Urist
theneverfox
SteefLem
wagesj45
Zak
henfredemars
Dizzy Devil Ducky
Zink
dabster291
chrisbit
just another dev
SorteKanin
cyberic
Zak