companies want to reach users, so they join Threads.

meta wants to federate Threads because it allows them to claim that they are not a “gatekeeper” under the EU’s new social media law and therefore not have legal responsibility for the content hosted by it.

a side effect of this is that I can view content posted by companies on Threads via a federated instance.

This is not necessarily the corp’s intention or them being generous. it is just a direct result of Meta using the fediverse as a loophole to get around an EU law and how ActivityPup functions.

I don’t actually think that this is an example of EEE because the Fediverse is not more popular than typical social media experiences, nor does it desire to become more popular or take over things like Facebook or Twitter. It simply wants to be a smaller alternative. I really think if it weren’t for the EU, meta would not be federating Threads.

I’d encourage you to have another look at the data.

What does this actually mean? That Threads users won’t be able to see content on those instances (and vice versa) once Threads gets its ActivityPub up and running?

I see a lot of of these instances citing privacy concerns, but everything we do on the fediverse is more or less open info. Unless I’m mistaken, Zucc could have already scraped Mastodon data if he wanted so I’m not sure how that’s relevant.

Now, if they were saying they didn’t want their users feeds to be flooded by Threads content, since posts there will almost undoubtedly have more engagement, then that would make sense.

the slight technical competency needed to navigate the fediverse might help keep low-quality users away and mitigate the “summer reddit” effect.