I have my problems with Meta, but I’m hoping this will help Mastodon grow

  • Lvxferre@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    Fediverse? Do you mean, the Threadiverse?

    I’m being cheeky to illustrate a point - Threads will almost certainly harm the overall health of the Fediverse in the long run, with users relying increasingly more on Threads’ instance[s] to use Mastodon services and connect to people.

    • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      This may be a cynical view, but even if that does happen, the core ActivityPub protocol will still be intact and at worst be relegated to a small community of tech nerds, which is to say, basically the status quo.

    • Flax@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      Eh, I can see politicians self hosting their own instances from their party or what have you. Same with governments. There is a potential as well that x.com may decide to federate out of survival if it gets too big.

      • Lvxferre@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        This is just a guess, but I think that the likelihood of Twitter federating is almost to zero, unless forced by legislations to do so. It simply doesn’t benefit from that, since every group and individual leaving Twitter might as well defederate it, and odds are that the upper echelon there knows it.

        Instead I think that Twitter will try to associate the Fediverse with terrorists and what have you, to indirectly smear shit into its competitor Faecesbook/Threats.

        • Flax@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Tides change. I think federating tomorrow is definitely off the table. Heck, even next year. But if the Fediverse balloons more and more, they may have reason to.

      • Neato@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Why would they self-host and do work when they could just use Threads? It’s not like FB gives a fuck about treasonous political parties.

        • Flax@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Trump being deplatformed, while having good reason, could have likely concerned cabinets and governments worldwide that they may as well “just in case”. Also, having something like “10downingstreet@social.gov.uk” or “potus@social.whitehouse.gov” seems more legit then “10downingstreet@threads.net” or “potus@threads.net”. It’s a similar idea why they don’t use gmail/outlook addresses

          Keep in mind, I’m talking governments and media organisations. They could likely just ask an intern to do it for them lmao. The benefits outweigh the cost. Even plenty of tech nerds have personal instances.