▲ 113 ▼ Pull request to begin to add ActivityPub support to the bluesly PDS (github.com) submitted 1 year ago by irelephant@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/fediverse@lemmy.world 32 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] skullgiver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl 39 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (12 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 12 child comments replies: [–] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com 1 point 1 year ago Exactly. It is a huge, authoritarian, corporate platform that can absolutely ruin the fedi if it ever turns against us (think ads, bad moderation, nudging campaigns, etc). Its not at all as black and white as threads is but it is still a huge problem. permalink fedilink source parent [–] tonytins@pawb.social 12 points 1 year ago (2 children) I dunno. I still posts from the Bluesky bridge getting boosts. This might not be as bad Threads. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 7 points 1 year ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] audaxdreik@pawb.social 6 points 1 year ago Isn't that part of the benefit of federating, too? If Bluesky turns heel, just cut it back off again. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 10 points 1 year ago (6 children) Why would they protest and make it opt in? The whole point of the fediverse is that your posts are completely public. Literally anyone and anything can scrape it, your server would hand it to them on a silver platter. That's the point. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Microw@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago Because it happens everytime. They accuse people of "scraping the fediverse". permalink fedilink source parent [–] dfyx@lemmy.helios42.de 7 points 1 year ago (4 children) I've once been downvoted to oblivion for not defederating threads.com before it even went online. Fediverse people are weird. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] korendian@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (2 children) Eh, I think rejecting anything associated with Meta seems perfectly normal for people trying to get away from corporate social media. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] dfyx@lemmy.helios42.de 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) And I think letting everyone decide for themselves how they run their instances and who they federate with is an important cornerstone of the fediverse. I'm more than fine with people not wanting to interact with threads. But what happens on my tiny instance with me as the only active user shouldn't be cause for outrage. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] korendian@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago I fully agree with that. Personal choice is a big part of what the fediverse is a big part of what the fediverse is about, after all. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 2 points 1 year ago My unpopular opinion is that we should federate with threads. "Embrace extend extinguish" would depend on existing fediverse users migrating to threads. Quite frankly, I don't see that happening. In fact, if there's no federation, there's more incentive to use threads to have a presence. Embrace extend extinguish, if done on the fediverse, may cause an uptick in signups on other instances, and when extinguished, a portion of those users would leave. With the Google Chat / XMPP thing, people were using Google Chat, had xmpp support, it was cool, then google pulled the rug so users seemingly dropped. I don't think Meta has enough goodwill at all to even convince it's own users to return to it's platforms these days. I think Bluesky is more of a risk as it claims to be decentralised to rope people in, but isn't. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply)
[–] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com 1 point 1 year ago Exactly. It is a huge, authoritarian, corporate platform that can absolutely ruin the fedi if it ever turns against us (think ads, bad moderation, nudging campaigns, etc). Its not at all as black and white as threads is but it is still a huge problem. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] tonytins@pawb.social 12 points 1 year ago (2 children) I dunno. I still posts from the Bluesky bridge getting boosts. This might not be as bad Threads. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 7 points 1 year ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] audaxdreik@pawb.social 6 points 1 year ago Isn't that part of the benefit of federating, too? If Bluesky turns heel, just cut it back off again. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 7 points 1 year ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] audaxdreik@pawb.social 6 points 1 year ago Isn't that part of the benefit of federating, too? If Bluesky turns heel, just cut it back off again. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] audaxdreik@pawb.social 6 points 1 year ago Isn't that part of the benefit of federating, too? If Bluesky turns heel, just cut it back off again. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 10 points 1 year ago (6 children) Why would they protest and make it opt in? The whole point of the fediverse is that your posts are completely public. Literally anyone and anything can scrape it, your server would hand it to them on a silver platter. That's the point. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Microw@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago Because it happens everytime. They accuse people of "scraping the fediverse". permalink fedilink source parent [–] dfyx@lemmy.helios42.de 7 points 1 year ago (4 children) I've once been downvoted to oblivion for not defederating threads.com before it even went online. Fediverse people are weird. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] korendian@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (2 children) Eh, I think rejecting anything associated with Meta seems perfectly normal for people trying to get away from corporate social media. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] dfyx@lemmy.helios42.de 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) And I think letting everyone decide for themselves how they run their instances and who they federate with is an important cornerstone of the fediverse. I'm more than fine with people not wanting to interact with threads. But what happens on my tiny instance with me as the only active user shouldn't be cause for outrage. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] korendian@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago I fully agree with that. Personal choice is a big part of what the fediverse is a big part of what the fediverse is about, after all. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 2 points 1 year ago My unpopular opinion is that we should federate with threads. "Embrace extend extinguish" would depend on existing fediverse users migrating to threads. Quite frankly, I don't see that happening. In fact, if there's no federation, there's more incentive to use threads to have a presence. Embrace extend extinguish, if done on the fediverse, may cause an uptick in signups on other instances, and when extinguished, a portion of those users would leave. With the Google Chat / XMPP thing, people were using Google Chat, had xmpp support, it was cool, then google pulled the rug so users seemingly dropped. I don't think Meta has enough goodwill at all to even convince it's own users to return to it's platforms these days. I think Bluesky is more of a risk as it claims to be decentralised to rope people in, but isn't. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Microw@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago Because it happens everytime. They accuse people of "scraping the fediverse". permalink fedilink source parent
[–] dfyx@lemmy.helios42.de 7 points 1 year ago (4 children) I've once been downvoted to oblivion for not defederating threads.com before it even went online. Fediverse people are weird. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] korendian@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (2 children) Eh, I think rejecting anything associated with Meta seems perfectly normal for people trying to get away from corporate social media. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] dfyx@lemmy.helios42.de 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) And I think letting everyone decide for themselves how they run their instances and who they federate with is an important cornerstone of the fediverse. I'm more than fine with people not wanting to interact with threads. But what happens on my tiny instance with me as the only active user shouldn't be cause for outrage. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] korendian@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago I fully agree with that. Personal choice is a big part of what the fediverse is a big part of what the fediverse is about, after all. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 2 points 1 year ago My unpopular opinion is that we should federate with threads. "Embrace extend extinguish" would depend on existing fediverse users migrating to threads. Quite frankly, I don't see that happening. In fact, if there's no federation, there's more incentive to use threads to have a presence. Embrace extend extinguish, if done on the fediverse, may cause an uptick in signups on other instances, and when extinguished, a portion of those users would leave. With the Google Chat / XMPP thing, people were using Google Chat, had xmpp support, it was cool, then google pulled the rug so users seemingly dropped. I don't think Meta has enough goodwill at all to even convince it's own users to return to it's platforms these days. I think Bluesky is more of a risk as it claims to be decentralised to rope people in, but isn't. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] korendian@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (2 children) Eh, I think rejecting anything associated with Meta seems perfectly normal for people trying to get away from corporate social media. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] dfyx@lemmy.helios42.de 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) And I think letting everyone decide for themselves how they run their instances and who they federate with is an important cornerstone of the fediverse. I'm more than fine with people not wanting to interact with threads. But what happens on my tiny instance with me as the only active user shouldn't be cause for outrage. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] korendian@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago I fully agree with that. Personal choice is a big part of what the fediverse is a big part of what the fediverse is about, after all. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] dfyx@lemmy.helios42.de 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) And I think letting everyone decide for themselves how they run their instances and who they federate with is an important cornerstone of the fediverse. I'm more than fine with people not wanting to interact with threads. But what happens on my tiny instance with me as the only active user shouldn't be cause for outrage. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] korendian@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago I fully agree with that. Personal choice is a big part of what the fediverse is a big part of what the fediverse is about, after all. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] korendian@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago I fully agree with that. Personal choice is a big part of what the fediverse is a big part of what the fediverse is about, after all. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 2 points 1 year ago My unpopular opinion is that we should federate with threads. "Embrace extend extinguish" would depend on existing fediverse users migrating to threads. Quite frankly, I don't see that happening. In fact, if there's no federation, there's more incentive to use threads to have a presence. Embrace extend extinguish, if done on the fediverse, may cause an uptick in signups on other instances, and when extinguished, a portion of those users would leave. With the Google Chat / XMPP thing, people were using Google Chat, had xmpp support, it was cool, then google pulled the rug so users seemingly dropped. I don't think Meta has enough goodwill at all to even convince it's own users to return to it's platforms these days. I think Bluesky is more of a risk as it claims to be decentralised to rope people in, but isn't. permalink fedilink source parent