I’ve seen that some instances have already done it preemptively.

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

      I’m aware of that concept, but I’m having a hard time understanding how that applies to the Fediverse. It seems like we have an inherent protection from that tactic, even if we disregard defederation as an option.

      • bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        You know how Apple has extended SMS with iMessage? Like that.

        In other words, they take something open and established like activitypub, and then build all sorts of cool features on top of it, but those features impose lock-in.

        Eg. Maybe they make it so there’s some way of attaching media directly to posts, but only if the post is both posted and viewed from a Meta instance. And then, in a few years once they’ve become dominant due to everyone switching over to their platform out of fomo of those features, they break compatibility with activitypub and ruin the underlying structure of the fediverse.

        • Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Wouldn’t that just mean Facebook splits away from the fediverse into their own thing? The rest of the fediverse that don’t want anything to do with them would still keep existing just like it does now?

          To be honest I really don’t mind if the users that want to use Facebook leave Lemmy and go to Threads. That just means that there’s less people here but the ones that stay have values closer to mine.