• The Menemen!@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Embrace, extend and destroy is a known, well established, concept. Microsoft was quite open about how this is to be done.

    It has already happened to established decentralised networks. See here!

    Maybe it won’t happen to Mastodon, maybe they have the masterminds who can counter it. But it is imo pretty clear that this is what Meta plans to do.

    • GONADS125@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Read their privacy policy. They already admitted they will scrape info from 3rd party users/communities which interact with their users.

      This is not a good thing.

      • Kes@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        They can scrape info already. Anyone can set up their own private instance, federate with others, and scrape info from there, and I’d be shocked if Meta wasn’t already doing that. Besides the threads app collecting more data from the people that use the app, they can only collect data that is easily accessible from everyone else regardless of whether threads is federated or not

    • DanseMacabre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I get why people don’t want anything from Meta around stuff they use. They’re obviously awful. I just don’t think that even 5% of Fediverse users are going to ditch for Threads if Meta defederates. They were here before Meta and I can promise you not a single person on earth is signing up for Mastodon because it will federate with Threads only to have the rug pulled out from under them. This is a small niche community and that will not change with or without Meta. The people that Meta could siphon with EEE are already in their ecosystem.

    • thathoe@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t really see an argument for “extinguish” on that article. It looks like just “embrace, expand, unembrace.” I can think of a few reasons how meta could degrade the quality of the metaverse, but the example of xmpp doesn’t quite smell right - activitupub is mature (even if I disagree with lot of the core specs), and the fediverse is much more about “eventual consistency” instead of real-time chats where both side have to be online at the same time.

      I don’t really see an argument where Google drew people away from xmpp - the author themself said that nobody cared about the few xmpp users, so it’s not like Google was drawing long-time xmpp users away.

      I’d love to hear other opinions on that article.

      • DogMuffins
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Do you think Facebook wants to get involved because they’re excited about making the fediverse a better place?

        • btmoo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          No, they want to train AI models. They don’t give a shit about taking over ActivityPub.

          • DogMuffins
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Why would they need threads to train AI models?

          • Bleeping Lobster@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            They don’t need to take it over if they have enough unwitting users / communities / instances associating with their content & users, perhaps. Maybe they don’t care about a smaller competitor if they can just scrape all the data anyway.