15 ms·

> The Embrace, Extend, Extinguish argument also falls down at the last point for me: Extinguish. This is a tremendous amount of effort that Meta is undertaking

> The Embrace, Extend, Extinguish argument also falls down at the last point for me: Extinguish. This is a tremendous amount of effort that Meta is undertaking to try and… what? Stop the fediverse from growing? Defeat Mastodon, Meta’s mighty competitor? Well, if the author had actually cited the people whose arguments they're dismissing, the answer to these questions would be clear. Here's one. https://emacs.ch/@ramin_hal9001/111579818136072605 https://emacs.ch/@ramin_hal9001/111579818136072605 ----- In case of the article being edited after I leave this comment, here's an archive snapshot of what I'm responding to: https://web.archive.org/web/20231215205458/https://anderegg.ca/2023/12/15/the-threads-invasion https://web.archive.org/web/20231215205458/https://anderegg....

djur 3y ago
> after attracting a critical mass of users large enough to decimate the user base of the competing Mastodon network Threads already has 10-100x as many active users as Mastodon. How many more does it need to "decimate"? How much growth can you seriously expect Threads to gain from federation? > At this point, people begin to wonder what the point of Mastodon even is. This is already the case for many, many people. It's true that more people would end up thinking that if Threads successfully federates with Mastodon, but that's because the number of people who even know what Mastodon is would increase. A non-user is a non-user.
- some_furry 3y ago
  You're welcome to disagree with that poster's argument. I just shared it because I don't like when people don't cite the arguments they're refuting. It seems dishonest, even if no malice is intended. Thus, I sought to correct it. I don't have a strong opinion on Threads' existential risks to Mastodon, personally. I want nothing to do with Meta as a company, ever, and would simply block them if I ran an instance (regardless of whether they pursue 4-E or remained good neighbors). I do not, and never will, trust the company behind Threads. I don't need to spin more cycles on it than that.

djur 3y ago

> after attracting a critical mass of users large enough to decimate the user base of the competing Mastodon network Threads already has 10-100x as many active users as Mastodon. How many more does it need to "decimate"? How much growth can you seriously expect Threads to gain from federation? > At this point, people begin to wonder what the point of Mastodon even is. This is already the case for many, many people. It's true that more people would end up thinking that if Threads successfully federates with Mastodon, but that's because the number of people who even know what Mastodon is would increase. A non-user is a non-user.

some_furry 3y ago
You're welcome to disagree with that poster's argument. I just shared it because I don't like when people don't cite the arguments they're refuting. It seems dishonest, even if no malice is intended. Thus, I sought to correct it. I don't have a strong opinion on Threads' existential risks to Mastodon, personally. I want nothing to do with Meta as a company, ever, and would simply block them if I ran an instance (regardless of whether they pursue 4-E or remained good neighbors). I do not, and never will, trust the company behind Threads. I don't need to spin more cycles on it than that.