How to Kill a Decentralised Network (such as the Fediverse) écrit par Ploum, Lionel Dricot, ingénieur, écrivain de science-fiction, développeur de logiciels libres.

With Meta starting to actually implement ActivityPub, I think it would be a good idea to remind everyone of what they are most likely going to do.

  • 👁️👄👁️@lemm.eeEnglish
    2811·
    11 months ago

    Meta does not give a shit to absorb the fedi. We are like a thousandth of their size, just a blip on their radar. I have no idea where people get this idea of self importance that Meta cares about their 10 user server.

    • Banana_man@reddthat.comEnglish
      211·
      11 months ago

      If they didn’t why would they develop tools to federate? It’s obvious that the threads project was sped up significantly following musk’s obliteration of Twitter, so they wouldn’t go out of their way to implement such a feature if they didn’t have a very specific reason for it.

      A company’s goal is maximization of profit, so don’t assume they intend anything else. The activitypub userbase is too small to be a significant addition to their userbase but in this way they can destroy it before it escapes their control. They don’t take risks. Mastodon could seriously compete with threads and it’s gaining popularity. If one more big boom happens it might be too late to stop the fediverse from competing with meta in the most cost efficient way possible. Do not be lured in by the false sense of security, meta wants us to help maximize their profit. We aren’t doing that right now so Meta wants to stop us (or limit us, whatever they deem more profitable)

      • APassenger@lemmy.worldEnglish
        7·
        11 months ago

        They don’t take risks.

        Quibble: Meta took a huge write off because their metaverse didn’t get the reception they hoped.

        I think they take risks, just calculated ones. And sometimes… A founders ambition.

        • Banana_man@reddthat.comEnglish
          41·
          11 months ago

          It is as you say, but look at the difference. Allowing metaverse to grow is only going to hurt them, while the potential profits from the metaverse could be massive. They deemed it a risk worth taking because of the potential success. Meta won’t leave the fate of lemmy up to chance, because they decided we are not very likely to disappear in time.

        • 0xD@infosec.pubEnglish
          22·
          11 months ago

          The metaverse (that game) was released before it was done in any way for the marketing hype, but they are still working on the VR headsets. Once those are ready for mass adoption, the metaverse will have a comeback, and a hard one. People love sucking on marketing titties, and that won’t be any different.

      • Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        11 months ago

        Meta’s involvement is to “poison pill” fediverse if it really starts to take off. Or just outright buy the bigger/best parts and leave the rest wither…

    • yamanii@lemmy.worldEnglish
      152·
      11 months ago

      I bet XMPP users were saying the same thing about google talk, maybe try reading the article?

    • XYZinferno@lemmy.basedcount.comEnglish
      42·
      11 months ago

      Might be because of Threads, and Meta seeking to use ActivityPub themselves.

      I don’t disagree with you though; I don’t think the fedi is big enough at the moment to register as more than a blip on their radar, as you said.

        • Minarble@aussie.zoneEnglish
          7·
          11 months ago

          It costs peanuts to eliminate a weed in your yard when it first sprouts.

          It also gets the jump on your neighbours who might be interested in this little weed as well.

          Also you can’t have unmonetized weeds popping up everywhere they might inject colour and variety into your barren add riddled hellscape.