Meta, Facebook's parent company, is looking to launch their own fediverse platform. Some people are already advocating to block it en masse.
You must log in or register to comment.
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community’s icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
- 0 users online
- 15 users / day
- 238 users / week
- 638 users / month
- 1.28K users / 6 months
- 1 subscriber
- 1.67K Posts
- 28.2K Comments
- Modlog
Too many of you still have meta accounts, quest headsets, and sympathy for a company that can’t/shouldn’t be trusted with anything. They’re the reason for Trump being elected, the erosion of human rights, and many other atrocities on top of being a privacy nightmare. I don’t want them anywhere near the fediverse.
Yeah, I don’t know where you’re from, but over here if you don’t have a Whatsapp account in working order you can’t… do things.
I hired a company to wire my house and they won’t communicate over anything else. I am in maybe five friends and family groups where every social event in my life is put together. I recently noticed a family member and I didn’t have each other’s numbers anymore, since we only ever communicate over Whatsapp. At work events people will show you a QR code for Facebook or Whatsapp and expect to receive the same back.
I get that a lot of people, especially in the US, don’t notice, but Meta won this fight like a decade ago. I don’t like it, but that ship sailed as far away as Amazon dominating online shopping.
I have had independent contractors offer it as an option, but most still have a phone number or have too many customers who aren’t tech savvy enough to use something like that. There’s really no way a reputable business in my area would survive that way.
I don’t know what your area is, but everybody here is tech savvy enough to use WhatsApp. It’s assumed to be just… part of how phones work. Both my elderly parents use it. My mom is on multiple chatgroups I had nothing to do with setting up. She only reaches out to me for help if she thinks something is spam or phishing. I can’t stress this enough: nobody texts. Text messaging happens over WhatsApp unless you’re receiving TFA notifications or automated messages from companies or the government, kinda like email.
As for the business, I’m sure if I had requested a phone call they would have called me, but it was a telecom firm and it wasn’t really a big conversation. Guy just went “here’s my WhatsApp, we’ll ping you there” and we understood it to be the way it was gonna go. I’ve had delivery drivers reach out to me over it when they had my number on hand, unprompted.
Whatsapp is so big here that it’s not just that everyone uses it, you are practically require, forced, to use Whatsapp.
I hate whatsapp, but they require it at the university if I want to be informed. Doctor appointments are also. via whatsapp.
Hah. During the pandemic the government here would reach out to you for vaccine appointments over Facebook and WhatsApp. I personally know at least a couple of people who dabbled in antivax stuff and wouldn’t pick up the phone but still got their shots after the government reached out that way.
Not that Meta has anything to do with that, but it was funny to me to see the government embrace the vectors of misinformation to shame people into not being idiots.
I live near a major city, most people haven’t had to learn anything like that over their existence: we have good cell phone reception over wifi too, perhaps that is it.
Tech is just not reliable enough for me to have any experience working with anyone who I would take seriously or who would work with anyone like that. I thought you should know your experience isn’t the norm, especially in any place I have been in the USA.
Almost anyone who approached with Whatapp is seen as poor, fly-by-night, and likely a grift here. “Why not use your phone number if you are trustworthy?” Would be the opinion here.
No, wait, this isn’t a “my area” as “my city” or whatever.
I mean it works like this country-wide here.
Nobody in the country can operate without WhatsApp. That’s not a thing. I am not in the US and I’m telling you here WhatsApp is just how sending text messages works. For everybody. Apple or Android.
Don’t know where you live, but my experience of NL is that everyone and their dog did things via WhatsApp. Even government services, would absolutely struggle to abandon all things Meta-related entirely while living there.
…Nasty, what the hell? Why?!?
Meta won. They won social media. Worldwide they’re absolutely huge. Entire countries never got the “Facebook is for old people” memo, and on many Android territories the default messaging app is effectively WhatsApp. And of course there’s Instagram. That one’s worldwide.
The only thing I’ve seen threaten Meta’s dominance in this space recently is TikTok. Twitter is a footnote, mostly a residual self-sustaining place for politicians and journalists to talk to each other.
because it gained popularity back when mobile plans didn’t include free SMS, back in the feature phone era.
This. The countries where Meta only has “a lot” of marketshare are the ones that were early to make SMS available for free to everyone.
In countries where they were late to that, Meta controls the market.
@MudMan I only use Facebook for WhatsApp though, I avoid it everywhere I can, their devices, Instagram, Facebook
@hedge @Jeze3D
Same. I never got rid of my Facebook account, though. I still have multiple work relations that will reach out to me that way, and my work phone is the one I have logged in to it. I keep it off my home browsers and personal phone.
But you can’t NOT have WhatsApp. It’s just not an option. If people thought it was hard to get Americans to stop using Twitter, this is an order of magnitude bigger.
My friends refuse to use anything else for our group chats so I’m stuck with it if I want to keep in touch. I don’t use it much outside of that. 🤷
Every time a big company gets into an open source space, they try to take it over. Hopefully everybody in the fediverse recognizes that.
Looks at article.
Yeah, I think they might realize it lol
Happy to see it though, I’ve been saying they should be defederated right out of the gate ever since I first saw these rumors.
It kind of doesn’t matter whether everyone in the fediverse recognizes it or not. People around here often forget that they are in the vast minority when it comes to tech literacy in the world. Most people are not interested in the experience that lemmy currently offers, because it’s far too complicated and people asking simple questions are often met with scoff and scorn, because the question has been asked before and they should have just searched for an answer or because it’s so simple, obviously it’s just <insert complicated technical explanation here>.
The fact that none of this is approachable to a tech naive person is precisely why microsoft killed OSS in the late 90s, why google killed XMPP, and why it’s extremely likely a place like meta or another company might succeed in effectively killing off a platform like activitypub (altho I don’t think it’ll kill it entirely, I do suspect that they will slowly kill it by bleeding users over to their platforms). You see, what these large brands have is recognition - people who are not tech literate still know what google is, what facebook is (they may not know they’ve rebranded to meta), and what microsoft is. These companies have the resources to throw actual designers at this space and provide a front end interface that is friendly to just about anyone. Combine good UX design with a company that people recognize and a huge platform from which to advertise to users (imagine logging into facebook and being presented with all the cool new things you can do on the fediverse) and you’ll get normal people trickling into the platform.
Here’s where things succeed - these platforms will start as open, and so all the normal people will now be able to talk with their tech friends who are also in the fediverse, and slowly these platforms will become monoliths. They’ll start curating the experience more as user reports roll in, and as they tighten the reigns. Over time you’ll find that you can’t reach these users unless you’re also on their platform, and your non-tech literate friends will ask you to migrate to their platform so you can continue to interact through the same channels that they’ve been interacting with you. While you may be unwilling to migrate, some people will be, and slowly but surely the platforms will dominate the space. They might be sunset eventually as a way to kill off the protocol, or they might just simply turn into their own walled garden.
The only way forward I can see which is resistant to attacks of capital of this nature are when an open source protocol actually starts to center design during the development of the platform. You can’t just tack a user design expert onto a platform like Lemmy and ask them to make things make sense, because federation itself needs a whole new set of terminology, designed by people who understand how non-tech literate people think, and a whole new backend to support a front end that’s truly user friendly. But user design is not friendly to github and most developers aren’t designers, so this isn’t something I see being accomplished anytime soon. The best that can happen right now is for better platforms to be designed for front-end and UX designers (something akin to github but useful to designers), to work on implementing these kinds of people from the beginning, and for open source projects to start reaching out more to designers, to start spending donated money on designers, and to center design as an important principle to OSS protocols.
There’s nothing wrong with Lemmy’s user interface design.
It has bugs, for sure, but if you just go to an instance, sign up, and browser the fediverse within that instance it’s a great experience.
You may find nothing wrong with the user interface, but I’m not you and I see plenty wrong with it. I’m not the only one with this opinion, as evidenced by a number of github bug requests, a near constant stream of questions in support communities on these websites, all of the votes my comment is receiving, and well, just asking like 10 random people what they think. I would encourage you to try to put yourself in other people’s shoes - if you’re struggling with that, simply ask them how they feel and listen to what they have to say.
Oh it’s absolutely full of UX bugs, for sure. It took me a week to sign up, because of a user interface bug. But those are all clearly just bugs, they’re not a design problem.
Lemmy needs a lot of work, but it’s an excellent foundation, at least from a design perspective.
as a not-tech-savvy (relative to other users here, anyways) person: i have absolutely no idea how you can say this with confidence. Lemmy’s UI and UX is probably still on the worse end of FOSS projects i’ve used and i’ve had a year and a half to get used to it. i still have to double back to find certain settings that i use literally every day in moderating the site! i hang with it because i know the developers are slammed, but this would not fly with even most of my friends, much less my mom or someone who has extremely low computer literacy and mostly learns by repetition.
A discussion around tech is a distraction, and it’s a fallacy to think people are too illiterate to understand the problem. The problem is one of incentives, politics, and economic policies. The problem is that people have forgotten that a free market only serves the interests of paying customers–and while that’s fine for the paying customers, users of online platforms are not paying customers. They are slaves to a system that will treat them like dirt because they become addicted/dependant to it.
It’s going to take a cultural revolution for people to learn this, not so different than it took generations to learn about the dangers of mercury/asbestos/cigarettes/climate change/plastic pollution. You are right that the change doesn’t happen with discussions around FOSS/fediverse/UX. It starts with a realization of the dangers of the business models of big tech.
So hold on, is this an open source space, a protocol or “like email”? Which of the poor analogies people use to convey excitiement about AcitivityPub are supposed to apply here?
Because, you know, Google got into the Linux space, into email and into open source software and it seems those survived the experience.
Not really. Google is responsible for the open source browser Chromium, which is the base for Google Chrome, Edge, Brave, Opera, Vivaldi, etc. They dominate the browser market, and they use their position to implement features outside the web standard. Their competitors (mainly Firefox) are not able to implement the non-standard features, driving them out of the market. Classic Embrace-Extend-Extinguish.
Technically, both Android and Chromebok are Linux-based. But Google has done everything possible so that they aren’t part of the “Linux space”, to the point that Android uses a fork of version 3.x of the Linux kernel (regular Linux is now at version 6.x).
Pretty sure that was Apple, not Google. Google joined the WebKit party later. By the time Google forked WebKit the other rendering engines (used by the FireFox and old versions of IE) were pretty much gone.
Also, Now that Google has forked WebKit, we’re back to two competing engines. And at least on the websites I run our traffic is about 45% each (and 10% other). That’s actually more healthy than it used to be (95% IE).
Private companies embracing open source browsers fixed a broken platform, it didn’t embrace/extend/extinguish.
Yes, FireFox is struggling for marketshare. Personally I think their biggest problem is they have a legacy code base that dates back to Netscape. It’s got nothing to do with Google.
Right. But you do notice how any of those scenarios fail to “extinguish” anything, right? I’m typing this on Firefox, which is still going strong and has negligible incompatibilities. Chromium didn’t eradicate the competition by embracing open source, it did so by succeeding with their commercial product. The ONE competitor it didn’t outright replace with its open source alternative is Firefox, in fact.
And in the other scenario Android simply forks and separates. Linux is clearly not threatened by Android or ChromeOS, and all of those remain viable, healthy alternatives to closed, paid competitors from Microsoft and Apple.
Can’t have your cake and eat it, too. Either the open source environment based on Firefox and Linux is thriving or it’s been dismantled by malicious adoption from commercial enterprises. Which is it?
Google is actually a great parallel here, because of what they did to XMPP (the federated chat protocol). They implemented it for hangouts/gchat. It was a good on-ramp that allowed people to talk across platforms. Then Google created a bunch of features that only worked internally and not with XMPP. Then they removed XMPP.
XMPP didn’t work on mobile. You had to have the app running to receive messages, and the battery wasn’t large enough to keep the CPU powered up all day.
Google was right to abandon XMPP and pretty much every other platform did it at the same time. It’s a shame they all chose proprietary solutions but XMPP was never really an option once smartphones entered the picture.
Somebody not being able to message me while I’m offline is a fantastic feature that I wish we still had. I miss that.
deleted by creator
Good! Meta has proven time and time again that them and their services are not to be trusted. Deplatforming that trashfire before it even starts is a smart move.
I’m going to assume you misspoke there, but the notion of fediverse instances “deplatforming” Meta is… quite the notion.
Defederating from Meta is not so much “deplatforming” them, as refusing to be in their platform.
Maybe not the right word to use, but the fediverse coming together in agreement to not federate with “Threads” takes away a lot of the benefit Meta gets from creating a federated service in the first place. It’s basically pulling the rug out from under Meta before they’ve even taken a first step on it. It’s a smart move and I support it 100%
No it doesn’t, because the only benefit Meta gets from creating a federated service is to have the same back of the box feature as BlueSky.
Like, there is literally no other advantage for them. The paranoid assumption that this is a ploy to remove competition is ludicrous. Nothing about ActivityPub competes in any meaningful way with Meta. If I had to bet, the entire concept is fully a PR move.
Okay, someone explain to me cus i apparently don’t have the critical thinking skills to figure it out on my own.
What does Meta want from joining the fediverse? What is the draw for them???
There’s a business strategy called embrace, extend, extinguish that they’ll try to use to snuff out the fediverse.
They were bleeding users so they want some ways to tap into existing user pool and they think it is easy to get that by simply federating, but they are about to find out the hard way why it won’t go the way they want.
This was a very illuminating view from another post
Read this one earlier. Great article, wonderfully written.
I’d imagine they see a new platform/user base they can dump a ton of money into and slowly take for themselves. At very least, another well of user data. If their app was significantly better than the smaller dev’s, would you mind if there was an ad or two?
I am hoping we keep their grubby hands off, so there is no chance of them destroying this growing platform.
Honestly i would never use another meta product, idc how nice their app would be. i like my funky jerboa app and that’s that! Lol. But - i get your point. A lot of users prefer usability over privacy.
^ The eternal struggle that most likely leads to our eventual downfall as a society.
Bro fuuuuuuck that company. That company is the definition of evil. As if dividing our country and selling off all our private data wasn’t bad enough for them.
Yes, please. We can’t expect anything good coming from them.
Last time we were burned (or at least I am aware of) was with Jabber and Google Talk.
It helped them bootstrap their instant messaging, and once everyone was using it they simply blocked access.
It is pretty much guaranteed that Facebook will do the same thing.
I don’t see what there is to gain from this, I don’t want mega-corporation in my social media anymore. especially not after what has been happening to their platforms. if their users want to join the fediverse, the account creation process is always open as long as they can follow the rules!
And of course there’s always the fact that their end goal will not be good for any of us, no matter what it is there is a 0% chance our interests align
It’ll be interesting to see what happens with this in the long run. I think the fediverse see’s Meta’s EEE play coming from a mile away compared to previous examples of big corps killing a standard. If Meta really does fork ActivityPub, I could see two webs of federation existing side by side. Enough of the fediverse is against Meta’s integration that Meta breaking the ActivityPub standard won’t force everyone to follow along. If enough instances stick to spec, then there’s still a fediverse to interact with on spec. Some will if they think the large user base Meta brings is worth it, but not all.
You can defederate from their server, but if they “embrace, extend, extinguish” the ActivityPub specification, then the game is over just as well.
I don’t think that’s the case here. Enough of the fediverse is resistant to Meta’s play here to keep a significant chunk of ActivityPub platforms running on spec and able to interact even with a Meta-fied version of ActivityPub existing. Other examples of EEE happening to open source standards seem to start with the community generally trusting the big corps to respect the standard where here no one expects Meta to play nice. The fediverse is an internet within the internet and Meta’s biggest bargaining chip to join up is a large user base but if the fediverse is fine staying small (which I think it is) then there’s no need to play Meta’s game.
Luckily ActivityPub it’s not the only federated protocol…
That website’s background is giving me some 1980s Macintosh vibes. I like it!
Edit: I went ahead and made a Macintosh background image to use on my desktop. Only 87 bytes!
Just because they are bribing us to let the torjan horse in doesn’t mean we should or have to
We don’t need them.
Cool, so what can we do? I would like to join the army fighting off the meta hordes!
Simply by advocating in fediverse to defederate Meta. That’s it.
Let them! There’s nothing saying other instances have to federate with them. Kind of the beauty of the whole thing, really.
Not exactly. What Facebook is expected to attempt here is an embrace, extend and extinguish strategy.
That only works if we care about the bells and whistles they add. Nobody here does or else we’d still be on those platforms. That strategy just doesn’t work with a federated network that doesn’t connect to your instance.
They’ll have their own instance with bells and whistles that nobody connects to and we’ll have our federated network. It’ll be exactly like the current structure but they’ll have an instance instead of a dedicated platform.
Meta has a monetary interest in divering from the activity hub standard. They will use it to stand out from all other federated instances with cool features you can only use on meta instances.
New people will join metas instances because they are “clearly better” and it will be difficult to deny. Sure there will be ads, privacy concerns etc. but most people don’t care about that.
The rest of the federated network will over time lose users to meta because people want to stay connected and that’s difficult to do when two instances don’t share the same features.
The end result is meta oficially forking activity hub and disconnecting from the rest of the federated network.
It’s the death of activity hub and what we are trying to build here.
The only way to prevent it is by preventing meta instances from taking off. The main way to do that is to not allow their instances to benefit from the rest of the federated network and to inform meta users of better alternatives. It’s impossible for a disorganized opensource project to keep up with the features that 1000’s of meta developers are paid to do.
Those people that would join that instance and care about that are already on Meta platforms, they can continue to stay on them if they wish it doesn’t affect our communities that we’re building here.
Good. The people that leave these communities for the Meta ones are probably not people that I would want to be communicating with already, this is a positive, not a negative. You’re acting like we need billions of users for healthy communities, a few hundred to a few thousand (what we currently have) is more than adequate.
You mean what most instances are planning to do already? Again, the logic doesn’t add up. We’re planning to defederate from their instances right out of the gate, so them having a fork of activitypub makes no difference to our communities.
No it’s not, stop being ridiculous.
Again, you’re acting like we care about those features. If we did, we wouldn’t be on this janky alpha software. I love Lemmy, but it’s got a lot of growing pains.
I can’t stand all this doomer talk, it’s so exhausting.
This is the rebuttal i needed to hear 🥲 i want to have faith we can withstand meta’s tar-like ooze seeping into the fediverse
It just doesn’t make sense.
“They’re going to have the vast majority of users with more features and be defederated from us!”
… You mean the EXACT structure we have now? That’s where 99% of people are already, those platforms already have more features than we do, and we’re not connected to them already. Them doing what is being described has literally zero impact on our communities. This is all so annoying and I’m tired of having the conversation.
/rant
Like accessibility features? Moderation tools? Profile migration? It may be different in beehaw.org, but here on kbin.social those are features we’re lacking. To my knowledge, moderation is explicitly undefined by the entire ActivityPub spec.
Just in case it wasn’t clear, I hate Meta. I hate them with a burning passion. I don’t want to see them burn down the fediverse like they’ve done to online privacy and democracy as a whole. But they’re not something we can afford to scoff at and ignore.
They won’t be offering bells and whistles we want, they’ll be offering features we need. They’ll run their own troll farms, brigading their way across the fediverse, and say “look at all these trolls! We’re gonna create moderation tools to stop these ne’erdowells! And we’ll integrate them into the spec, and give them to you! For free!”
We’re all proud to say we wouldn’t fall for such a Trojan horse, but we need to be ready to recognize whatever that Trojan horse looks like.
Which are already being developed as the r/blind community has migrated to Lemmy and is getting those taken care of or at least getting the ball rolling. I’m sorry Kbin doesn’t have that traction yet, but it too will get there. Again, we’re still in alpha/beta stages of these platforms. These things take time.
It is something we can ignore because it literally can’t happen unless nobody defederates them when they get it going. Which, looking at all the community discussion isn’t going to happen. You can relax.
They’re all attached to Meta still, it’s a moot point. Nobody who deliberately moved to decentralized platforms is going to go back to a centralized instance to use tools they haven’t been using all this time, it doesn’t make sense.
Let them make instances and hundreds of bots on them, we’ll defederate those too. Which is the beauty of the fediverse design, we get to keep control of our communities and keep them safe. Just like beehaw defederated from lemmy.world (temporarily) until moderation tools get more powerful.
Oh, I get that theory, though I’m not sure I completely agree. Either way, unless I completely misunderstand how ActivityPub works, their instance can effectively be isolated to its own little sandbox depending on how many other instances decide to share with them. Further, if you’re on an instance that decides to share w/ Meta’s, you can skip over to another one that doesn’t. So Meta can be isolated by instance owners and/or users.
I’m no ActivityPub expert, but what people more knowledgeable than me have pointed out is that this results in fragmenting the Fediverse, which ends up hurting it on the long run. I’d definitely not want to be on an instance that federates with Facebook, but I also wish none of the larger ones choose to do so.
Exactly. That strategy doesn’t work with this structure, I think a lot of people are still trying to understand that the fediverse is not like other platforms/networks.