No joke, this PR adds preliminary ActivityPub (i.e. Mastodon) support to the PDS. 🤯
IMPORTANT: You shouldn't expect full interoperability with this alone! At most, you should expect that your p...
We pretty much had this when the first reliable Mastodon<->Bluesky bridge came online. The Fediverse side protested and made the entire system opt-in, making it practically unusable because people that don’t have a favourite Linux distro don’t know what a fedi is and why they should bridge to it.
When this goes live, I expect people to treat it the same as every other sizeable social media joining the Fediverse, with outrange and block lists.
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.
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.
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.
We pretty much had this when the first reliable Mastodon<->Bluesky bridge came online. The Fediverse side protested and made the entire system opt-in, making it practically unusable because people that don’t have a favourite Linux distro don’t know what a fedi is and why they should bridge to it.
When this goes live, I expect people to treat it the same as every other sizeable social media joining the Fediverse, with outrange and block lists.
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.
I’ve once been downvoted to oblivion for not defederating threads.com before it even went online. Fediverse people are weird.
Eh, I think rejecting anything associated with Meta seems perfectly normal for people trying to get away from corporate social media.
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.
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.
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.
Because it happens everytime. They accuse people of “scraping the fediverse”.
Mere mortals
I dunno. I still posts from the Bluesky bridge getting boosts. This might not be as bad Threads.
Tbd but bluesky is at least pretending for now that it is user focused.
So this can be symbiotic
Isn’t that part of the benefit of federating, too? If Bluesky turns heel, just cut it back off again.