A federated internet is forming. It’s built on open protocols like ActivityPub & connects services like Mastodon, Threads, Pixelfed, Tumblr, Wordpress and more into a connected network known as the fediverse. And everyone from tech enthusiasts to Mark Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey seem to want in.

  • Fapper_McFapper@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    Get fucked corporate America! Go get fucked real good. The fediverse was always what the internet was supposed to be. Not this corporate manipulation web you’ve weaved. Get fucked.

  • Fluid@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    9 months ago

    If the system can’t protect itself from being overwhelmed by the cancer of corporate interests, then it’s never going to survive. New wave internet needs to learn from the downfalls of its predecessor. The design must have protections built in to prevent capitalists from capitalising, or else it will inevitably fall.

    • haui@lemmy.giftedmc.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      We need people like you. I wouldn’t have thought of the possibility (honestly). Do you also have ideas how that would come along?

  • smallsubsidy@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    can someone here eli5 how Meta is gonna take control of the fediverse? isn’t it supposed to be a decentralized thing?

  • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    38
    ·
    9 months ago

    meh. more fud

    meta hasnt declared or made any intention of overtaking the fediverse, but that hasnt stopped a metric fuckton of people freakin the fuck out or generating fud blog post after fud blog post

    its like claiming meta is going to overtake and own email because they stood up an email server.

    • Steve@communick.news
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Yes! That is most literally true!

      People doubt the face value benign intension of Meta with regard to the Fediverse.

      Which leaves uncertainty of their real intention.

      Naturally causing fear of a self interested malicious intention.

      Which all seem to be quite reasonable concerns, given Meta’s market position and history.

        • Steve@communick.news
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          As I said, I agree with the literal facts. The implications in your phrasing I disagree with.

          Instead of unfounded, I would call it unproven.
          Instead of scaremongering I would say warning.
          And generally I avoid using absolute terms like “all”, since only it takes one counter example, to make such a statement factually wrong.

        • Kbin_space_program@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Facebook is literally arguing to the US federal government that regulations about social media usage by children, and the data they sell from it, aren’t their problem but are the responsibility of Google and Apple.

          Why do you trust them?

          • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            9 months ago

            im sorry, whats that have to do with the interwebs maintaining neutral control of AP? sounds like ziiiilch.

            lets keep apples to apples here in the fediverse

    • TacoButtPlug@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      You think they’re going to announce their intentions?

      Can I sell you a home in Guatemala? It’s the best deal you’ll ever come across.

    • BrikoX@lemmy.zipOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Which point? Or did you see the title and wrote your own narrative?

    • isoA
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Literally this. Right now you can’t create your own mail server because big corpos like Google, Microsoft is going to make you end up in spam folder.

      Now, apply this to fediverse.

      • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        i run mail servers professionally and personally. youre right its not easy, but its not impossible. its a regular topic of self hosting.

        but more to your point, how has meta usurped smtp? ok. now apply that to AP.

        • isoA
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          9 months ago

          You can technically create but you can never be sure that your mails will received.

          They don’t usurp the service but make it uncomfortable/unstable to you.

          • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            This is a distinction with little difference, which is convenient for them, because they can say well ackchyually we’re not stopping you from self-hosting nerd when in practical terms they are.

          • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            11
            ·
            9 months ago

            ha, uh. ok whatever you say there boss.

            do you any actual information regarding meta controlling the AP protocol with their single instance and no seat at the protocol table, or is this all just a huge premature, knee-jerk reaction to a big scary corporation?

            • isoA
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              12
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              It is about power. If they have more than 50% of the users, then all other instances should comply with their changes and obey them. If they don’t, then they’ll be blocked by more than half of the users. No instance owner will take this risk.

              I’m trying to explain you that you don’t really need to own something to own it. If you have enough power, you have it already.