• redcalcium@c.calciumlabs.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    By all means block Meta instances if you want, but they have 3 billion users, they definitely don’t give a shit about a “competitor” with a few hundred thousand users.

    If they don’t give a shit then why do they add federation feature at all? It doesn’t make sense.

    • Steeve
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      deleted by creator

      • dumpsterlid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah and it’s also normal for them to act like sociopaths and shrug and say “sorry, this is just how capitalism works” when it gets exposed how cynically awful they been behaving.

        There is zero evidence ethics will be followed here, Silicon Valley has spent decades building a good argument the precise opposite will happen.

        • Steeve
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          deleted by creator

          • wtfeweguys@lemmy.whynotdrs.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Counterpoint: it’s not about capturing the current audience so much as heading a threat off at the pass.

            I’m not going to argue way or other re: defederation. Just putting myself in their shoes and looking at the field they’re entering. They likely recognize there’s a brief window right now to capture twitter’s disaffected audience as they stumble while a nontrivial subset of those users are exploring open-source, non-corporate alternatives.

            It makes perfect sense for them to cast the widest net they can in this moment. And it also makes sense for them to try to stifle the non-corporate side before it has a chance to gain any solid footing.

            • Lemmino@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              There are no users “exploring open source alternatives.” Have you seen the Lemmy signup flow? It’s a complete shitshow that probably turns away 95% of people to begin with.

              Facebook almost certainly doesn’t see Lemmy and Mastodon as a threat or competitor. They adopted ActivityPub because it’s nice, and they’ll move on as they need to scale, and Lemmy and Mastodon will continue to survive as they always have.

              • wtfeweguys@lemmy.whynotdrs.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                What’s 95% of zero?

                Seriously though I am one person seeking open source alternatives and I came here because others showed me the way.

                The number is not zero, and the cultural moment is ripe for non-corporate options unless corporates recapture the audience before they’ve even lost them.

                That’s the crux of my perspective.