he/him (they/their if you are a machine)
An electronics undergrad with an interest in climate movement, ethics in technology and embedded systems.
Languages:
- Polish
- English
Alrighty.. 
At this point this could be very well a ‘official’ video from the #Kremlin 
Several years ago everyone agreed that unencrypted data flow is dangerous and #internet as a whole should avoid it. #TLS spreaded everywhere. Now it is default and unencrypted traffic is marked as not secure.
(Sometimes I have to agree to 3-4 warning popups to log into some development service in internal network via http 
)
I wonder when we finally agree the same about #MessagingApps and when we would understand #e2ee should be a standard. And messaging apps without #encryption should also have big red scary warnings to discourage people from using these. People should know before they send something what would be used against them in the future.
Wow the Mastodon FAQ on Meta is a piece of work. Really short-sighted and apolitical.
"Will Meta embrace-extend-extinguish the ActivityPub protocol?"
1. Yes.
2. 'No, look at XMPP, that is still around' is the worst argument. XMPP is completely harmless and neutered with respect to challenging platform power. There are great people working on it and I use it daily for many years, but from a political perspective it is dead. It improves but is steadily years behind the curve with features. Momentum and perspective matter! It could have been turned around if an easy integration with Mastodon was made as it would have given Mastodon instances e2ee messaging, but that didn't happen. (Not too late for that yet btw!)
3. Here is how Meta will EEE ActivityPub:
It will start with Meta being the first ones that ship full account portability including post history. That is hard problem to solve decentralized, which is why we have it yet. But Meta won't care about that. They will just use Meta nameservers as a centralized identity provider which will make it possible. (Similar to how Bluesky does it btw. ) They are extremely well positioned to do this, FB is already "the identity platform" and there is regulatory pressure. From there on there will be increasing incompatibility and extensions on Meta's terms.
Think how many people are trapped in Google, Microsoft, Apple or other similar ecosystem. People does not use Google because they are google addicts. They use it because it offered a value and even shittiffied is bearable.
They are not the addicts, they are exploited by the platform that trapped them in due to both centralization and lack of proper regulation ensuring that the platforms are for the people, not profit.
This is a very individualistic approach that ignores life cycle of the platform. In a brief, platforms start offering a value for users even at the loss, then exploit them in favor of business clients, then exploit the business client. For more detailed look please check #enshittification:
Recently I've seen takes that #reddit protest failed because people are too addicted to the platform. These takes are especially frustrating, because they are so very close to the answer yet fall flat due to some unspoken assumptions.
The unspoken assumption here is that people actively choose to be on the platform, therefore platform lives. It might seem obvious for anyone who knows politics as a mud pit, but if you take a more nuanced look, you'll see some cracks.
So the next time do not protest once a platform does something bad. Demand platform accountability constantly, indefinitely. Demand that the relation between you and the platform is shifted more towards an equal business partners than the big bad corporation form cyberpunk dystopia and a regular citizen.
4/4
stux⚡️
Wonder of Science
Mad Argon 
𝓻𝓻𝓪