Everywhere I look there are people advocating for defederation from this and that! Do you even understand what you’re suggesting? Do you get what’s the point of decentralized social media and activity pub?

This is supposed to be free and accessible for everyone. We all have brains and can decide who to interact with.

If meta or any other company manages to create a better product it’s just natural that people tend to use it. I won’t use it, you may not use it and it’s totally fine! It’s about having options. Also as Mastodon’s CEO pointed out there’s no privacy concern, everything stays on your instance.

Edit: after reading and responding to many comments, I should point out that I’m not against defederation in general. It’s a great feature if used properly. Problem is General Instances with open sign-ups and tens of thousands of users making decisions on par of users and deciding what they can and can not see.

If you have a niche or small community with shared and agreed upon values, defederating can be great. But I believe individual users are intelligent enough to choose.

    • Problematic Consumer@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I have no problem with people making educated decisions or ask for change based on facts. Fully agree about quality over quantity as well. My issue is FUD, having no idea what you’re talking about and still trying to convince everyone of that is harmful. When people working day and night on these protocols say there are no privacy concerns and no one can show you ads etc. and yet someone with literally zero understanding of the matter claims otherwise.

  • Nougat@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The general public does not understand federation. When Threads makes content that I have created via kbin.social visible on Threads, very many people are going to think that that content was created on Threads. And Meta then takes that content, aggregated with all the other non-Threads initiated fediverse content, and monetizes it. They are using “not their content” to enhance the desirability of their portal, and certainly placing ads in its vicinity. As with any instance, they can also curate that content to promote their chosen agenda, which is surely in part “increasing engagement.”

    We’ve seen how “increasing engagement” has been done by Meta and other companies already: ragebaiting and misinformation. While there is no way to completely prevent this, I want to avoid content that I have created from being used in that way. If there was a way for me to individually defederate from Threads, so that Threads could not see my content, I would turn that switch on in an instant. So far as I know, the only way for my content to be excluded from being viewed via Threads is for the instance my account is on to defederate. I’m not in any way asking for kbin.social to defed from Threads, just noting that that is currently the only functional way to accomplish the stated goal.

    I do understand that there are already instances that have done that very thing, and I am certainly able to jump over and use one of those instead. I may do that at some point, but I am pleased with the interface at kbin.social, and developer of kbin’s work. For the moment, I want to watch and see how things play out, becoming more informed before I make a decision about how I interact with the fediverse.

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

      You realize that defederating prevents you from seeing their content but not the other way around right? Meta will see your content regardless. So many people are confused about this

  • AnonTwo@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    But what do you do when a known Dictator walks in?

    Meta is going to establish itself, and go back to old habits once it’s on top in the fediverse.

    • h6a@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      This and having a fuckton of scummy users being sent our way by accounts like Libs of TikTok. Harassment will be unbearable and large-scale, especially for tiny instances.

  • TheBenCrazy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Copying this from another comment I made. Defederating would pretty much cut off a lot of potential new users that want to see posts on Threads while also not wanting to have a Meta account and all the issues that come with it. People here need to realize that they are in an echo chamber. Mastodon and Lemmy needs users and content. Cutting a big portion of that would kill it in the long run. There would be nothing to “extinguish” in the first place in their complaints of Embrace, Extend, Extinguish.

    • Problematic Consumer@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Exactly, I have a lot of normie friends that use threads, I don’t want to use it but would love to interact with them. Best of both worlds

          • Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            I would have phrased it as “supporting” Threads. If you don’t defederate, Threads will take over your instance. Either directly through the sheer amount of posts, or indirectly by colluding with your instance admins. Or both. It’s how they operate. And then the ads and data harvesting and walled gardens will come.

    • Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Defederating would pretty much cut off a lot of potential new users that want to see posts on Threads while also not wanting to have a Meta account and all the issues that come with it.

      Kinda the point, no? Kill Threads in the cradle by denying it access to the fediverse.

  • CarlsIII@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Aren’t the people demanding that no instance ever defederate for any reason and that defederation shouldn’t be allowed the ones who have an inner dictator that needs to be tamed? I thought the entire point of things being decentralized is that individual instances can operate the way they want, including choosing which other instances to federate with. But for some reason, this freedom shouldn’t be allowed? Am I missing something here?

    • Problematic Consumer@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      If you cared enough to read my post (or comments under maybe) you would’ve seen that I have no problem with defederation in general. My issue is defederation of general instances with 10s of thousands of users for literally no reason but FUD. If you can prove that some other instance is harmful, you should definitely consider defederating

        • Problematic Consumer@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          no instance ever defederate for any reason

          did I say this?!

          Also advocating for defederation (censorship) on an instance with 100K users is dictatorship. specially when you can’t prove that said instance is harmful.

          • CarlsIII@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Dictatorship would be one single authority over all instances telling each instance what they can, cannot, and must do. Individual instances choosing who to federate or defederate with when people are free to choose whichever instance they want to be a part of (including being a part if multiple instances simultaneously with different accounts) is nothing at all like a dictatorship. It’s not even censorship like you claim. Nothing is stopping you from joining an instance that still federated with instances that another instance has defederate from. Or starting your own instance and making these decisions for yourself.

            Why did I say “no instance defederate for any reason”? Because instances that have defederate have given reasons, and they naysayers like you are not only saying they shouldn’t be allowed to do that, but that doing so is “censorship” and “dictatorship”. I think you need a dictionary because you don’t seem to know what certain words mean.

            • Problematic Consumer@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              No one is stopping you to migrate from an authoritarian country either (most of the time) and yet they’re called authoritarian. Also, I’m not saying instances “shouldn’t be allowed to defederate”, I’m saying advocating for this on a general instance with 100K users is wrong. If this was a niche or small community with agreed upon and shared values (like beehaw for example) that would be understandable.

              Saying things like “Oh, But You Can Run Your Instance” is dismissive of the issue, There’s literally no option to migrate accounts and expecting average users to deal with this mess is beyond me.

              • CarlsIII@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                Did you really just equate trying to leave an authoritarian country with signing up for a different federated instance? Every post you make just further confirms that you don’t know what the words “dictator” and “authoritarian.”

                Also, I’m not saying instances “shouldn’t be allowed to defederate”, I’m saying advocating for this on a general instance with 100K users is wrong. If this was a niche or small community with agreed upon and shared values (like beehaw for example) that would be understandable.

                First of all, this is probably some nuance you should have provided in your original post where you only say that calling for defederation makes you a “dictator” and in no way indicate that there are situation where you think defederation is appropriate. I don’t have time to read your entire posting history just to determine where you’re actually coming from. You could have probably included this nuance in your original post and avoided some of the backlash you are getting.

                But second of all, how would you enforce what you are proposing? If larger instances were prevented somehow from defederating, wouldn’t that require some sort of “authority” making that decision for those instance? That doesn’t seem to align with your values based on what you’ve posted.

                • Problematic Consumer@lemmy.worldOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Did you really just equate trying to leave an authoritarian country with signing up for a different federated instance?

                  Yes I am, you are suggesting I don’t know the meaning of these words, so I’ve provided an example of the exact same situation (importance doesn’t change meaning of words here, does it?)

                  If you censor me, you have censored me! The fact that you’re a government or admin of instance doesn’t change word’s meaning.

                  this is probably some nuance you should have provided in your original post where you only say that calling for defederation makes you a “dictator” and in no way indicate that there are situation where you think defederation is appropriate.

                  In hindsight, I should’ve but in response to most comments I’ve acknowledged that it’s fine in a lot of situations

                  But second of all, how would you enforce what you are proposing? If larger instances were prevented somehow from defederating, wouldn’t that require some sort of “authority” making that decision for those instance? That doesn’t seem to align with your values based on what you’ve posted.

                  May I ask what made you think I’m looking for enforcement here? I believe in human coordination and freedom of choice. If I join a general instance, I don’t expect admins to decide who I can interact with, that’s all!

  • PostmodernPythia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    If an instance you’re in defederates, just start your own. Why complain about what people want to do in their instances? Just find another one.

    Yes, that’s exactly how you sound.

  • IowaMan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Glad you said this. People demanding large instances like this one defederate from stuff they don’t personally like are, frankly, very mislead and trying to be little dictators. That’s not their decision to make.

  • kukkurovaca@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Defederation is an important tool and is part of what makes the fediverse work. In my experience, people who are strongly defederation averse are mostly either quite new to the fediverse or have the relative privilege of never having to really deal with bad actors especially en masse.