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

    I’m not signing up for Threads, but looking at some of the stuff other people show me coming out of there, it might end up just being yet-another-nazi-instance when they open up federation so might just end up getting blocked on those terms and not so much the “being meta/facebook” terms.

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

    I’m still on the fence about that being a good thing. I’m kind of looking forward to being able to see Twitter style content from major companies but without ads via my Mastodon account.

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

        Right after I logged into Threads, with a new account, by first 2 pages were posts from Zuck, Wendy’s, Netflix, a Facebook fanboy, and another Wendy’s ad. I tried to screen shot it, but the shit app realized I was idle, and used that as an opportunity to refresh the content.

        30 million people jumped into this stupid thing this AM.

      • 52fighters@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I wouldn’t mind having the ability to send angry messages to them again, especially if me not following them also means I don’t ever see their content in my feed.

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

        companies want to reach users, so they join Threads.

        meta wants to federate Threads because it allows them to claim that they are not a “gatekeeper” under the EU’s new social media law and therefore not have legal responsibility for the content hosted by it.

        a side effect of this is that I can view content posted by companies on Threads via a federated instance.

        This is not necessarily the corp’s intention or them being generous. it is just a direct result of Meta using the fediverse as a loophole to get around an EU law and how ActivityPup functions.

        I don’t actually think that this is an example of EEE because the Fediverse is not more popular than typical social media experiences, nor does it desire to become more popular or take over things like Facebook or Twitter. It simply wants to be a smaller alternative. I really think if it weren’t for the EU, meta would not be federating Threads.

  • jtb@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Suspending them before they have actually done anything wrong is a bit like a pre-crime.

    • Poob@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You don’t let pedophiles babysit your kids, and you don’t let Facebook federate with your social network.

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

      It’s not like “they” are some unknown quantity though, it’s the Facebook people. It’s not weird or unreasonable for people to not want the company that got fined literally a billion euros for data privacy violations just a couple of months ago to get involved in a thing they like

      • jtb@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m not on Facebook but I know people who are, and they are just ordinary people who made a poor choice and didn’t read the terms and conditions. It’s all those people who you are excluding, not just Facebook employees.

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

      They already spread medical disinfo like wildfire, got someone who sold our state secrets to the highest bidder elected, and house sociopathic terrorists like libsoftiktok. That’s enough.

    • paul@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      What is the benefit of “banning the crap out of them?”

      • rm_dash_r_star@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        This is how the tried and true agenda goes using Meta’s threads.net and the Fediverse as an example.

        • Meta’s site gets wildly popular because of corporate backing
        • Meta’s site does something on purpose to cause poor operability with the rest of the Fediverse
        • People not on Meta’s site can no longer properly communicate with people on Meta’s site, they go to Meta’s site
        • The Fediverse gets fractured and nobody cares because everyone is on Meta’s site
        • Meta’s site is the sole survivor and the rest of the platform dies.
        • Meta enshitifies their site as corporations typically do (think Twitter)

        So yeah, ban the shit out of them. The proper term is defederate them, but do it with extreme prejudice.