It still needs to be profitable for them. Why would they want non profitable content freeloading on their servers? No doubt it will be collected and sold, just a work in progress.
They sell it to advertisers. We would be hard to target since were not on Metas platform. I would think it’s worth less since its not immediately usable for stuffing an ad down our throats and pseudoanonymous.
Initially, Slack integrated with IRC. Which was great! It meant I could use xchat to talk with folks, and could set up simple bots using standard IRC tools.
And then Slack killed that feature…but it absolutely didn’t kill IRC, because die hard IRC users never cared about Slack in the first place.
My prediction is it’ll be the same — what sort of people will be attracted to Threads vs a smaller “proper” instance? Probably the sort of people who would never consider a federated platform in the first place.
What exactly did Slack “allow” though? The continued existence of an ancient protocol with a niche but dedicated following of predominantly “old school” tech people?
The Fediverse has 1 million active users. Threads has 130 million active users. This is not an EEE play because a 100% successful EEE play would amount to increasing the Threads userbase by less than 1%. Meta is doing this for non-EEE reasons.
One possible non-EEE reason would be to have plausible deniability for monopolistic practices. If they make a show of interoperating with irrelevant nobodies like us, they can pretend to be a nice tech company rather than a mean anti-competitive monopoly.
Extinguish: When extensions become a de facto standard because of their dominant market share, they marginalize competitors who are unable to support the new extensions.
By that logic Lemmy/Mastodon/fediverse are already extinguished. Those of us in the fediverse are already “marginalized” wrt Twitter/Threads/Facebook/whatever.
There are very good reasons to hate Meta, but personally, I think EEE isn’t the biggest issue.
If there’s XMPP involved in that pattern then I question your recollection of events that happened. If anything this is going to be more like e-mail where commercial service providers might want to set up some obstacles to avoid spam but also hurt little guys in the process. We’ll see how that goes with EU DSA laws though.
No, no, no, you must respond with a Wikipedia article.
Also, the first article that you responded to has multiple times when Microsoft did this and you should go actually read it. Don’t need the specific example that you think acts like a counterpoint to think giant tech corps are assholes and will act like it.
It seems like everyone is forgetting that time exists, and corporations will learn from their mistakes and evolve.
Email was developed, standardized and freely distributed long before the internet became what it is today.
If email were created in this day and age it would look very different and probably fail because of corporate mismanagement (while CEOs take their golden parachutes).
I believe google hangouts and xmpp would like to have a word with you. There was probably a universe where federated xmpp was as ubiquitous as sms, but in this universe, google federated, brought users over with cool features, and then defederated when they had all the users.
If you want another example from the same company in modern times, look at chrome and http/css/js. Google’s chokehold on the web ecosystem with chrome means that whatever they do, everyone else has to follow suit or not be compatible with the browser that something like ~75-90% of users use
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish
Still just on the first step, embrace.
Apparently threads didn’t support federating replies (comments) on posts until this.
And you still won’t be able to reply to the federated comments on posts, just see them.
They are really not in a hurry to properly support federating. I honestly didn’t realize Threads’ federation support was this pathetic.
They haven’t figured out a good way to turn the federated data into cash yet.
Are you kidding? Lemmy itself is 100% public and easily scrapable. It’s likely easier to get data on users.
It still needs to be profitable for them. Why would they want non profitable content freeloading on their servers? No doubt it will be collected and sold, just a work in progress.
Why would it not be profitable, it’s still user data?
They sell it to advertisers. We would be hard to target since were not on Metas platform. I would think it’s worth less since its not immediately usable for stuffing an ad down our throats and pseudoanonymous.
Maybe they noticed that a lot of servers in the wider Fediverse had preemptively defederated from them, and decided it wasn’t worth their time.
it was literally in beta and the majority of the user base on threads don’t know what the fediverse is.
Maybe. Or this will play out like Slack and IRC.
Initially, Slack integrated with IRC. Which was great! It meant I could use xchat to talk with folks, and could set up simple bots using standard IRC tools.
And then Slack killed that feature…but it absolutely didn’t kill IRC, because die hard IRC users never cared about Slack in the first place.
My prediction is it’ll be the same — what sort of people will be attracted to Threads vs a smaller “proper” instance? Probably the sort of people who would never consider a federated platform in the first place.
Just speculation and I could certainly be wrong…
we just need to make sure that we don’t rely on their instance(s) too heavily so we only have minimal losses when they eventually do drop support.
Absolutely.
How long ago did those things happen, and what makes you think the uber wealthy capitalist owner-class hasn’t learned from their past “shortcomings”?
Why would multi-billion dollar corporations allow things like that to happen to them again?
Slack killed IRC integration mid 2018.
What exactly did Slack “allow” though? The continued existence of an ancient protocol with a niche but dedicated following of predominantly “old school” tech people?
Neva 4get
The Fediverse has 1 million active users. Threads has 130 million active users. This is not an EEE play because a 100% successful EEE play would amount to increasing the Threads userbase by less than 1%. Meta is doing this for non-EEE reasons.
One possible non-EEE reason would be to have plausible deniability for monopolistic practices. If they make a show of interoperating with irrelevant nobodies like us, they can pretend to be a nice tech company rather than a mean anti-competitive monopoly.
Completely agree.
The Wikipedia article itself has this to say:
By that logic Lemmy/Mastodon/fediverse are already extinguished. Those of us in the fediverse are already “marginalized” wrt Twitter/Threads/Facebook/whatever.
There are very good reasons to hate Meta, but personally, I think EEE isn’t the biggest issue.
Possibly preventing being locked out of the EU.
deleted by creator
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pattern_recognition_(psychology)
If there’s XMPP involved in that pattern then I question your recollection of events that happened. If anything this is going to be more like e-mail where commercial service providers might want to set up some obstacles to avoid spam but also hurt little guys in the process. We’ll see how that goes with EU DSA laws though.
No, no, no, you must respond with a Wikipedia article.
Also, the first article that you responded to has multiple times when Microsoft did this and you should go actually read it. Don’t need the specific example that you think acts like a counterpoint to think giant tech corps are assholes and will act like it.
It seems like everyone is forgetting that time exists, and corporations will learn from their mistakes and evolve.
Email was developed, standardized and freely distributed long before the internet became what it is today.
If email were created in this day and age it would look very different and probably fail because of corporate mismanagement (while CEOs take their golden parachutes).
you can’t EEE an open protocol.
I believe google hangouts and xmpp would like to have a word with you. There was probably a universe where federated xmpp was as ubiquitous as sms, but in this universe, google federated, brought users over with cool features, and then defederated when they had all the users.
If you want another example from the same company in modern times, look at chrome and http/css/js. Google’s chokehold on the web ecosystem with chrome means that whatever they do, everyone else has to follow suit or not be compatible with the browser that something like ~75-90% of users use
google hangouts is proprietary and xmpp/jabber still exists.
Hangouts was built on xmpp, and used to allow federation. Yes xmpp still exists but it’s functionally dead.
google talk was built on it; hangouts is a completely new application.
xmpp is still around; it’s just competing with matrix.
Yes you are correct, I had the two reversed in my head.