3 ms·

And the larger Mastodon instances aren't going to connect to Threads either: 1) to protect their users from Meta inhaling user data, and as a source of spam, h

And the larger Mastodon instances aren't going to connect to Threads either: 1) to protect their users from Meta inhaling user data, and as a source of spam, harassment etc. If Threads is not defederated upfront, it would be blocked soon after. 2) The sheer volume from the data from Threads is not going to be manageable. So stop pretending that they are.

capableweb 3y ago
> to protect their users from Meta inhaling user data If you're running a public Mastodon instance, Facebook has surely, one way or another, managed to "inhale" your user data, at least for market research. Only way to avoid that is to run a private instance, and then connecting to Threads/Facebook/Meta wouldn't be a threat regardless.
tick_tock_tick 3y ago
> to protect their users from Meta inhaling user data, and as a source of spam, harassment etc. If Threads is not defederated upfront, it would be blocked soon after. Mastodon doesn't protect user data in any meaningful way. That data is all available to meta if they want it.
- SideburnsOfDoom 3y ago
  > Mastodon doesn't protect user data in any meaningful way That may be true (yes, I've seen Bloonface's essay on this), but it doesn't mean that Threads will be federated with the rest of Mastodon, i.e. allowing user interaction across instances, threads content showing up on other mastodon user's feeds and vice versa. Blocking that is what "defederated" means. https://me.pcmag.com/en/social-media-1/18060/threads-wants-to-join-the-fediverse-but-some-mastodon-users-say-no-way https://me.pcmag.com/en/social-media-1/18060/threads-wants-t... https://fedipact.veganism.social/ https://fedipact.veganism.social/