Well, that's what has always been mentioned, defederated from them, AFAIK there's no way of blocking it completely from the fediverse, so if your instance's admin wants they can decide to not block them and you can interact with meta.
If your instance defederates and you want to still see their activity then you can choose an instance which is still federated with them.
Embrace, extend, extinguish. They'll play nice with the Fediverse for a while. Maybe years. But then they'll introduce a new feature to the Fediverse as a "good will gesture". Then they'll make features available to only people federated with Threads. Then they'll make features only people on Threads can see. And so on and so forth. We SHOULD care where the content comes from. Platforms that are neutral should be where our content comes from.
You're just describing how the fediverse works.
One social network that is partially comparable with another network. Like subscribing to pixelated from mastodon, etc. not all features are available, but some are.
Not only is there no such thing as a neutral platform, but the decentralization of mastodon and the fediverse in general is specifically to address that.
The danger of meta is their data scraping - something they can already do anyway without their own servers being federated.
Why?
Why are humans who use threads so repulsive to you that you leave an entire federated social network just because some people used a particular server?
Threads isn't going to federate with Lemmy. It's not the same sort of communication and the crossovers are ugly and confusing. Mastodon is where the real federation/defederation decisions will take place.
I can see a social media implementation of a communities section and feeding off lemmy that way. Essentially cloning reddit through their users and using lemmy communities content as a Kickstarter tool.
Sure, if they clone Reddit then I definitely could see it, though I think Lemmy communities are a much bigger risk for them to open up to since they're so moderation dependent. At least with Mastodon what you see is all based on your follows. Reddit loves to abdicate on responsibility by just leaving it all to the mods, but I don't think Meta can get away with that, and especially when they don't directly control the mods.
Because I don't want Facebook to get my content, nor do I want their content in my feeds. I joined the fediverse to be as far away from corpos (facebook, twitter, youtube) as possible.
Meta is only pushing, not pulling. So if you’re an influential person there is less incentive to create a masto account. Threads content will appear in both places, but Mastodon content will only get exposure with mastodon’s smaller user base.
The fear is that the broader Fediverse will get hooked on a flood of Threads content. They have much more daily active users, and as we already know, large instances can easily dominate a feed. And Threads will be gigantic.
We're starting with the ability to follow threads users from activitypub clients, but we will get to the ability to follow accounts from activitypub servers on threads as well
If 2. will actually be a problem some instances will defederate, while many users will choose an instance which allows them to follow who they want. I'm all for interoperable social media/messaging, because it gives users the choice.
I'm curious when they'll add inbound federation. It could lead to massive amounts of spam, so they'll probably block instances or inbound traffic quite quickly.
Hopefully it won't end like email, where it's really difficult to start federating to the big providers (Threads). But even then, we'll still be able to choose any of the current instances and continue without them. Edit: It's not a big problem if Threads doesn't show all posts, since other instances will still show them to users who care. Compared to email where a 100% delivery rate is critical (at least for important stuff).
Infinity grow is a mirage. We need to understand that. It's fine if a social media as a limit.
What's important is how you manage to keep it in life. Even here, you have a limit. It's conservative to think that it will last for ever as you will encontre the same issue as with infinite grow.
The fact is that thing appear, have a lifespan and die. Social media aren't immune to it.
Capitalists don't care if something is legal or not. Just how much the fine will impact their bottom line. And if anyone can prove it. I 100 percent guarantee you that every major tech company is technically in violation of the GDPR etc. it's just a matter of whether or not it will ever be provable enough to be actionable.
The data is out there. Meta does not need threads to scrape it is the basic thing to take away.
That's actually the most interesting concern I've seen raised about this. I hadn't thought about that. The embrace, extend, extinguish thing is what you see most people raise as a issue.
All your stuff is already public on the internet without any special access being granted. If they want the convenience of receiving ActivityPub packets and metadata, they can just stand up a honeypot instance and some fake accounts. The Fediverse isn't built for privacy.
They don't need ActivityPub for that. Nearly everything on the fediverse is public and scrapable. If they want to monetize fediverse data, they already can