The enemy of my enemy…isn’t like my best friend or anything, but I sure am cheering them on…
But in all honesty, as much as I love the idea of fediverse. I really do want a “town square” that’s moderated by the community. I would love something like wt.social. or a wikipedia equivalent to Twitter.
I find it hard to decide who to hate less because both are so ambiguous about their future. ~~Currently threads doesn’t allow access to any of their content without signup and using their damn mobile app~~, while twitter allows free access from any browser.
On the other hand, twitter is recently limiting access without an account, and threads could have a browser version and federation with the fediverse.
I think splitting the user base between them is probably good. Ideally TV/radio will stop defaulting to “tweet us with the hashtag…” They’ll have use multiple channels and that might open the door for Mastodon and the fediverse too.
I’ll keep saying it, but I’d like to see another big player (Microsoft, Google etc) embrace activitypub. That would bring balance and snub EEE for Meta.
Considering the stranglehold that huge platforms have on users, it makes a lot of sense for organizations to have their own fediverse servers, with communities and access they control.
For example, a lot of governments use Twitter as a way to communicate in disaster situations. But since Elon lets anyone with a credit card have a check mark and bans people on a whim you can’t trust that the account is a real one or that it won’t be cut off in time of need. A Mastodon server would solve both of these problems.
That’s true, but now you have to remember which server is legit. One benefit of a centralized service is that you have centralized verification, which at one time was a point in Twitter’s favor.
I’m not very well versed in cryptography, but if I understand the certification system for websites, different sites apply to a certificate provider, of which there are multiple.
Maybe something like this is possible for the Fediverse? Where a user or community or instance can be “verified” by one or more trusted verification “agencies” or whatever.
Me neither, but I think the point here is that it is better for the fediverse if there’s competition between Meta and Microsoft as well as competition between each of them and the current fediverse.
The enemy of my enemy…isn’t like my best friend or anything, but I sure am cheering them on…
But in all honesty, as much as I love the idea of fediverse. I really do want a “town square” that’s moderated by the community. I would love something like wt.social. or a wikipedia equivalent to Twitter.
I find it hard to decide who to hate less because both are so ambiguous about their future. ~~Currently threads doesn’t allow access to any of their content without signup and using their damn mobile app~~, while twitter allows free access from any browser.
On the other hand, twitter is recently limiting access without an account, and threads could have a browser version and federation with the fediverse.
I think splitting the user base between them is probably good. Ideally TV/radio will stop defaulting to “tweet us with the hashtag…” They’ll have use multiple channels and that might open the door for Mastodon and the fediverse too.
I’ll keep saying it, but I’d like to see another big player (Microsoft, Google etc) embrace activitypub. That would bring balance and snub EEE for Meta.
Considering the stranglehold that huge platforms have on users, it makes a lot of sense for organizations to have their own fediverse servers, with communities and access they control.
For example, a lot of governments use Twitter as a way to communicate in disaster situations. But since Elon lets anyone with a credit card have a check mark and bans people on a whim you can’t trust that the account is a real one or that it won’t be cut off in time of need. A Mastodon server would solve both of these problems.
That’s true, but now you have to remember which server is legit. One benefit of a centralized service is that you have centralized verification, which at one time was a point in Twitter’s favor.
I’m not very well versed in cryptography, but if I understand the certification system for websites, different sites apply to a certificate provider, of which there are multiple. Maybe something like this is possible for the Fediverse? Where a user or community or instance can be “verified” by one or more trusted verification “agencies” or whatever.
I wouldn’t trust Microsoft as far as I could kick them with their long history of EEE
Me neither, but I think the point here is that it is better for the fediverse if there’s competition between Meta and Microsoft as well as competition between each of them and the current fediverse.
As far as I know, a Threads site is coming. It only just launched so not everything is ready yet :)
Are you not able to see this?
Nope, should I? I tried firefox and brave.
Anyway, I guess this implies that there is a website nearby, as the other user says.
Are you in Europe? Threads is blocked in the EU…
You were right, I changed my location and now I can see it.
Interesting. I do not have a threads account and can see that post and replies.
Weird, i can. Firefox, Linux.
I can’t. Also Firefox and Linux. Strange indeed
Edit: Ah, I am un Europe. Nevermind