• helenslunch@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Why should I believe this kid won’t spit in my face all of a sudden, when they’ve taken every single chance they could repeatedly, knowing that it was wrong and not caring what repercussions would befall them?

    Because Fedi puts up a glass window.

    They simply can’t do anything to hurt the Fedi. The Fedi was built specifically to resist that kind of intrusion. They can only hurt themselves, and help their users by showing them how easy it is to transition to a platform that isn’t riddled with ads and data-mining while still remaining connected to their family and friends/news/etc.

    There is no data for Meta to mine by federating that isn’t already publicly available. Federating does not suddenly give them unfettered access to every connected server.

    • GONADS125@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      The examples I listed were to demonstrate the fact that meta/FB is a bad actor, not that all are applicable to lemmy.

      Also, the lemmy.world team admitted that lemmy lacks the moderation tools required for federation with threads.

      This doesn’t pair well with the extremist content popular and promoted on threads. And I’m tired of hearing about the false solution people keep pretending exists in the form of personally blocking instances.

      That may solve me not seeing the content, but what about my fellow users? What about people browsing without a profile/not signed in?

      I care about more than myself. I care about the health of fellow human beings on this site, and I don’t want Threads to increase the amount of radicalization and extremism on this site. I don’t want more people to fall victim to radicalization. I have lost family to qanon/maga cults and I think we need to protect the integrity of the fediverse.

      When players like threads/meta try to join in, I believe it is the responsibility of admins of the large instances to protect their users and refuse to federate with them. Period.

      • helenslunch@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        The examples I listed were to demonstrate the fact that meta/FB is a bad actor

        Okay but, we all know that already. This discussion is about federating with Lemmy/Fedi.

        • GONADS125@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          Okay but, we all know that already. This discussion is about federating with Lemmy/Fedi.

          Tell that to the astroturfers simping for FB/Threads…

          And do you understand how you reinforce an argument with supporting evidence? I wanted to establish factual information supporting a clear history of the company’s bad practices. That was/is relevant to consideration of federating with a platform.

          In fact, lemmy.world has already defederated with instances due to failure to moderate far-right extremism. So why would they federate with Threads when far-right extremism is already a systemic issue and they have admitted lemmy lacks the necessary moderation tools to manage Threads federation?

          It seems obvious to me that is a bad idea and it would cultivate a more toxic user experience with more recruitment for radicalism/extremism.

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            Tell that to the astroturfers simping for FB/Threads…

            No one is astroturfing lemmy. People who disagree with you are not paid actors. They just disagree with you.

            • GONADS125@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              I wasn’t referring to people disagreeing with me. I upvoted users I disagreed with in this post’s comments to promote discussion (such as upvoting your downvoted comment here).

              I was referring to people that engage in disingenuous argumentative tactics clearly pushing an agenda, whose presence is also accompanied by what seems like blatant vote manipulation/brigading. This was present when Threads federation was originally a being discussed a little while back. That’s what I was referring to.

              I don’t think I’m going to go out of my way to track down examples, but you may be able to find some from the link to where my comment is originally from.

              You can also assume I’m wrong, and that’s okay by me. But astroturfing is absolutely a tactic Meta employs. Source

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

                I do in fact disagree with you, yes. I am not, however, paid for it

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

                    We’re talking about astroturfing, so yes it is quite literally the difference.

                    You’re not guaranteed a place where your opinions are the only ones expressed, ever in life.

          • helenslunch@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            Tell that to the astroturfers simping for FB/Threads…

            And do you understand how you reinforce an argument with supporting evidence?

            Wow, the fucking hypocrisy of those 2 statements in the same breath. Anybody who considers that this could actually be good for the fedi is “simping for Meta”? What a fucking child.

            That was/is relevant to consideration of federating with a platform.

            It is not even in the slightest, unless such federation somehow supports Meta, which, to my knowledge, it does the opposite. If you’d like to provide evidence to the contrary, I’m all ears. If you want to pull random accusations out of your ass about anyone who disagrees with you, you can take that shit elsewhere.

            • GONADS125@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              There’s no hypocrisy; you’re just stating a false equivalence. Not to mention totally ignoring the entire argument about radicalization on threads/inability to moderate it on lemmy.

              And you keep stating that my points establishing character in regard to Meta/Threads are irrelevant, but you aren’t making a good argument as to why. You fixate on that as a strawman argument while ignoring my point that lack of moderation on threads will negatively affect fediverse communities with toxic/extremist content.

              You’re arguing like a petulant middle schooler with ad hominem and strawman tactics. Get back to me if you can speak like a grown-up. Otherwise I’m not going to engage with you. (Before you “no u” me with another false equivalence, my remarks were not on the same personal attack level.)

      • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        It does seem like your goal here is to limit what other people can see, rather than curating your own individual experience. Do you believe that I should have similar influence on what content you are allowed to interact with?

        • GONADS125@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          I believe the users within instances should play a role in the instances’ decisions on the topic. I believe you should have as much say as I do in arguing your perspective.

          I’m simply making a case for why I think it is the wrong decision. I believe Threads should be treated like exploding heads and not be federated with.

          If you want to see such content, you still can. You can subscribe to that source, an instance federating with it, or host your own instance. But refusing to federate with it insulates the community from propoganda, misinformation, and radicalization.