Skip Navigation

Kev Quirk, one of the admins of Fosstodon (a Mastodon instance), destroys Meta in an email exchange.

fosstodon.org Kev Quirk (@kev@fosstodon.org)

Attached: 1 image Yeah, that's gonna be a hard pass from me thanks, Rachel. Zero interest in having a conversation with #Meta "off the record" or otherwise. Sharing this purely to be as transparent as possible with our members.

Kev Quirk (@kev@fosstodon.org)

The exchange is about Meta's upcoming ActivityPub-enabled network Threads. Meta is calling for a meeting, his response is priceless!

388

You're viewing part of a thread.

Show Context
388 comments
  • ok i'm not saying they won't but i've asked this before and nobody seems to be able to provide some mechanism by which they would destroy it

    is the system not federated? if meta starts acting up, can't everyone just defederate them? this is what i'm not getting

    if someone can explain to me what exactly is dangerous, i would appreciate

    • ok i’m not saying they won’t but i’ve asked this before and nobody seems to be able to provide some mechanism by which they would destroy it

      Read up on how they destroyed XMPP.

      is the system not federated?

      So was XMPP. That's why they're a huge threat to the Fediverse: they have experience in destroying federated systems.

    • I figured I'll write up a tldr on Embrace, Extend, Extinguish in case you aren't really feeling reading the articles.

      Embrace: Meta builds a federated Twitter/Reddit alternative, potentially called Threads but is right now P92, that follows the ActivityPub standard almost perfectly. Various Lemmy and KBin instances federate with them and share information. Users from Facebook and Instagram flood into P92, making it one of the largest instances.

      Extend: P92 starts adding nice, but proprietary features to their system. The allure of these features begins drawing users off of other instances to P92. Those instances are upset, but Meta insists it's doing nothing wrong, continues to follow the ActivityPub standard in some form, and tells the other instances to just implement the features themselves.

      Extinguish: Meta announces that due to incompatibility, they are withdrawing from the standard and defederating from everyone. Most users of this software are now on P92, and thus don't mind. Meta gets a fully populated Twitter/Reddit alternative, and the remaining ActivityPub instances wither. Without user support, the standard fails, and a new open source alternative is created to replace it.

      That strategy has been used to kill other open source protocols, and many people are worried it will happen again. My personal opinion is that servers should only federate with Meta if they follow the standard perfectly, and if they deviate even a little bit they should be universally defederated via software changes, but I'm sympathetic to the people that would rather be proactive than reactive.

      • I understand the concept of embrace extend extinguish

        i just don't see a significant chunk of fediverse user giving up on open source instances and flocking to Meta's instance. I can't imagine what kind of features they could add that could accomplish this. Sure, they could make a site that's more polished but if Meta enters the game, we're going to be seeing a huge influx of both users and development. open source alternatives will likely be very close in parity

        i think when considering this whole situation we need to calculate the potential positives and calculate if it's worth the risks - and those positives include huge amounts of money and people. this could be enough to push the fediverse to the next level of adoption.. the dream of having a decentralized social media system could become the standard in such a future.

    • https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html

      This blog explains really well how destruction from the inside would work. And personally I'm not excited to have all Facebook users on here, most of that website is extremely toxic.

      • That article has been posted several times and does not explain how Google "destroyed" XMPP - it assumes that XMPP was some hot shit everyone was using before Google and Facebook picked it up, when in reality it was used by next to nobody, most people who used it with Google or Facebook were just using it to talk to other Google or Facebook users, XMPP doesn't support a lot of features that consumers now expect in messaging, and since Google and Facebook dropped it it has returned to being a niche FOSS thing - only now its advocates blame Google and Facebook for its failure rather than the fact it's not a very good protocol and nobody uses it.

    • So, because us laymen can't think of exactly how they would do it, that means it's not possible?

      The best (and often only) indicator of future behavior is past behavior. And if we go on that, I think we all know how Meta looks.

      • you reduced my comments and favorited your own. lol

        look - nobody has given me a concrete mechanism by which they could do damage. neither on here nor on mastodon where I've had similar conversations. @thesanewriter was the only one who attempted to give some sort of method - and his was that Meta's platform could become so popular it steals users. That to me isn't really unique to the fediverse

        I'm not gonna hop over to Meta's platform just because it's nice and shiny.

        But look at the potential benefits of Meta investing heavily into the fediverse.. we're talking millions and millions of dollars in development. i say milk meta for all they are worth, they're a failing company anyway, this is a desperate attempt on their part

388 comments