8 ms·

Threads Enables Fediverse Replies

179 points by mkarliner 2y ago

mort96 2y ago
[flagged]
- jensensbutton 2y ago
  How is that your takeaway? Seems like the opposite of what's being said.
  - mort96 2y ago
    You're right, I read it as "disables" rather than "enables". That's on me, sorry.
- empath75 2y ago
  They're taking it slow at least in part because there were concerns about threads traffic overwhelming mastodon servers.
  - krapp 2y ago
    That shouldn't be a huge problem - many Mastodon servers are already blocking Threads by default.
    - dewey 2y ago
      Most people are probably on the 3 biggest instances and the "official" instances don't have it blocked as far as I can see (https://blog.joinmastodon.org/2023/07/what-to-know-about-threads/ https://blog.joinmastodon.org/2023/07/what-to-know-about-thr...). Blocking also seems like a silly thing for a network that is about being open and interoperable.
      - mkarliner 2y ago
        Quite, and, as I said in my post, I think we (the Fediverse) owe it to the rest of the Internet to enable the deconstruction of the current social media landscape as much as possible.
      - krapp 2y ago
        The protocol is open and interoperable. I can't build a Facebook but nothing is stopping Mark Zuckerberg from building a platform on ActivityHub. But there would be no point to a federated network if every node were required to accept traffic from all other nodes. That's just centralization with extra steps.. and centralized social media is what most people who move to federated networks are trying to avoid, to say nothing of the cost burden on smaller instances to handle all of that traffic. A lot of people block the big instances as well for similar reasons.
      - immibis 2y ago
        Is blocking spam a silly thing?
        dewey 2y ago
        No, but "spam" is subjective and while you can decide that for your own instance, doing it for a bigger instance on behave of your users seems a bit overreaching...but luckily I can just move to an instance where I agree with the rules or host my own.
      - immibis 2y ago
        Is blocking spam a silly thing? (Google Groups was to Usenet what Threads is to ActivityPub, and it got collectively blocked by all Usenet servers for spam, then decided to shut down.)
lolinder 2y ago
> Because I believe that Meta as a whole is moving to an open systems approach, not because Mark Zuckerberg is a nice guy, but because he is smart enough to go open before he is forced to by regulators, (or broken up). I think it's both more than that and less than that. Unless I missed some news, Meta's newfound love for product openness has only really manifested in Llama and Threads—I haven't seen any evidence of shifts in their core products. I think what's happened is that in both cases Meta knows that they don't really stand a chance of actually unseating the big players in that segment on their own, but that Meta can make a dent in their profit margins if they can dilute the value of owning that segment. Llama is squarely targeted at preventing anyone from owning AI. I think Threads is doing the same thing with microblogging. If Meta can't own a segment they're going to make darn sure that no one else can own it and use their profits from it to push Meta out of their core. If it also makes the company look more palatable to regulators, that's a nice side effect, but I'm not sure it would work as the primary goal.
- mkarliner 2y ago
  Well, personally I think that Meta is taking the threat of regulator action very seriously. You only have to look at how Google and Apple are in trouble. Owning WhatsApp, Threads and Instagram makes them a big target for breakup. And an open system defuses that significantly.
  - lolinder 2y ago
    > And an open system defuses that significantly. I'm not sure that it has as much of an impact as you think it does. Threads would not be a significant target for regulator action regardless of openness—it doesn't have enough share of the market to be interesting. Meanwhile, the openness of Threads does nothing to alleviate the concerns of their dominance in every non-microblogging social media category.
    - mkarliner 2y ago
      Meta could link Threads and Instagram in a heartbeat if they chose, and were't scared of the consequences. Threads is small fry at the moment, but a very good test and precursor to making the same play across the other properties. I respect your opinion BTW, I don't like flame wars. :-) It's worth remembering that the Fediverse is not just microblogging, there are platforms for pretty much every kind of social media play.
theanonymousone 2y ago
Still not in Europe?
- red_trumpet 2y ago
  Care to elaborate? It looks like Threads is available in Europe.
  - theanonymousone 2y ago
    In Switzerland,I don't see the setting to ensble Fediverse for my Threads account. Also I cannot find @myusername@threads.net in Mastodon.
- hn1986 2y ago
  These fediverse changes in Threads are in Europe but not in the EU yet. Threads itself is available worldwide, including the EU.
  - mkarliner 2y ago
    Yes, I'm in the UK, works here. I'd give up Threads to be back in the EU :-)
draxil 2y ago
OFC most of the fediverse has blocked threads already.
- bitcharmer 2y ago
  And for a very good reason
- pixxel 2y ago
  Seems reasonable. You stay in the Zuckerberg ecosystem and we’ll cut off its parasitic tentacles.
- jaredcwhite 2y ago
  Not sure where you're coming up with that. I'm aware of the "Fedipact" but I'd guess it comprises a fairly small percentage of users, and some users have taken steps to leave instances which block Threads.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
kmfrk 2y ago
Tumblr's been talking about the move for ages, but does anyone knoe what progress is being made towards it?
- sunaookami 2y ago
  I guess they want to finish the transition to WordPress first, since WordPress also has an ActivityPub plugin https://automattic.com/2024/08/27/shipping-tumblr-and-wordpress/ https://automattic.com/2024/08/27/shipping-tumblr-and-wordpr...
jmyeet 2y ago
I've been intrigued by Threads since it launched last year. Succeeding where there's a competitor as entrenched as Twitter is nigh on impossible. The network effect is massive. But of course there are chinks in TWitter's armor, specifically the whole blue check debacle and that Twitter itself is rapidly becoming 4chan (or even 8chan) and advertisers are understandably fleeing. Still, the chance of success isn't great. Launching it under the iG brand was probably a good idea, better than under Facebook at least. Still, when it comes to open source and integration with third-parties I keep thinking of the quote "open source is for losers" (that might come from this [1]), meaning all but the dominant player embrace interoperability and open source in a desperate attempt to topple the dominant player. I have no idea what usage looks like but I'm glad they haven't given up. I know Google would've canceled it by now (and probably replaced it with something that looks kinda similar, has a different name/branding but no compatibility with the old thing, if chat apps are anything to go by). I still say federation is something tech people care about but offers nothing of tangible value to end users. There hasn't been a successful federated technology since email. For a reason. [1]: https://siliconangle.com/2014/05/29/only-loser-vendors-are-truly-committed-to-open-source/ https://siliconangle.com/2014/05/29/only-loser-vendors-are-t...
- mkarliner 2y ago
  The entire mobile phone network?
  - loeg 2y ago
    That predates email and is ... not really a counterpoint to federation sucking for end-users? There's so much spam/phishing and somehow it's no one's legal responsibility.
    - yborg 2y ago
      Yeah that happens now on Xitter, that doesn't seem to be a federation problem.
    - nordsieck 2y ago
      Exactly. I know so many people who simply don't respond if the incoming call isn't in their address book.
wazoox 2y ago
"Embrace, Extend, and Extinguish".
crowcroft 2y ago
Would love to know how many people on threads interact with the fediverse beyond threads. I know it’s still early and features are being built out, but my guess is the number is close to 0.
- mkarliner 2y ago
  Again, not really the point. So long as Meta can say their platforms are open, they have a bulwark against regulators and/or being broken up. It really doesn't matter to them if it's popular or not.
  - crowcroft 2y ago
    I would go as far as to say they don't really want it to be popular, but I would love to see enough integration for there to be at least some attempt at competition.
- jaredcwhite 2y ago
  There's lots of Fediverse interaction on Threads. It's a little tricky still because you can follow Threads users from other instances but you can't follow accounts on other instances from Threads. That being said, I see lots of people (myself included) boosting, liking, and even commenting on Threads content from elsewhere in the Fediverse. And now that Threads has just started to publicly show fedi comments on Threads (not just to the OP), we'll get a better sense of engagement on any given post.
xyst 2y ago
What's the true goal here? Given the decentralized aspect of the fediverse, facebook won't be able to sell ad space here. Is threads hoping to become "the" instance in the fediverse? Then they can impose their will across the rest of the fediverse. threads: "oh, you have a single user instance and want to federate with us? Pay us $500 per user/year, and use our preferred server which allows us to sell ad space on your server"
- klysm 2y ago
  Embrace extend extinguish ?
  - dahauns 2y ago
    Entice, Entrench, Enshittify.
  - takeda 2y ago
    Exactly https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-netwo...
- nunobrito 2y ago
  Algorithms. Right now fediverse is growing and has very honest algorithms. Once Meta is on the scene, their "decentralized" timeline will look more enticing than others. It will be captivating and you'll prefer to hangout on their server with all nice extensions that just work there. With time, +90% of users won't bother looking on small isolated islands and you'll have facebook 2.0 in place. Anyways, it is a fair fight. Meta coming to fediverse already means that things on this side are interesting.
- nordsieck 2y ago
  > Is threads hoping to become "the" instance in the fediverse? Probably > Then they can impose their will across the rest of the fediverse. Nah. The play at that point would be to just discontinue support for federation and lock all their users inside the new walled garden.
- 2y ago
renewiltord 2y ago
> not because Mark Zuckerberg is a nice guy Mark Z was clear on Dwarkesh's podcast that when he has things open he does so because he thinks it will benefit Meta and he explicitly says it's not altruistic and that if it stops being useful he'll stop making things open.
nunobrito 2y ago
Just wait until they discover NOSTR.
- greentea23 2y ago
  Nostr makes so much more sense to me than the fediverse because your account is not bound to a particular server, so if your admin gets bored you can simply use other relays or host your own instead of being kicked off. And with this you get pretty significant fediverse interop: https://gitlab.com/soapbox-pub/mostr https://gitlab.com/soapbox-pub/mostr
  - nunobrito 2y ago
    I've been around BBS, web forums and social networks for almost 30 years now. Indeed NOSTR is completely fresh air and mindblowing. My account just works across any clients, doesn't need even need Internet nor electricity. I can print my note on a piece of paper and people can still verify that this is a verifiable text from me. Really in love with the tech, didn't had this feeling for quite a while.
JohnMakin 2y ago
I think this is great. I've been using threads for 6 months, and while I was never a prolific twitter user - I thought it sucked even before the elon purchase, now, it's entirely unusable to me (and I've tried) - I do like its interface, a seemingly "light" (by meta standards) approach to moderation, and now a step in this direction I think is a really good thing. As to the "why" I think it's fairly obvious. If they integrate with everything, they'll eventually become the defacto platform and/or steer users and engagement to their other platforms with less friction.
- downWidOutaFite 2y ago
  As an advocate for peace in Gaza the moderation has been anything but light. Can't even use the word zionist on there.
  - JohnMakin 2y ago
    Yea, this is a platform-wide thing and across most other platforms as well - I meant in terms of like, forcing you to edit posts with "forbidden" keywords like they love to do on IG (but never tell you exactly what you said wrong), tone policing, hiding comments between users arguing with each other, etc.
  - kameit00 2y ago
    You could use the fediverse directly instead of Threads if you don't want to be 'over-moderated'. Some server admins in the fediverse also go over board, but you can host your own instance in the fediverse or search for an instance that align with your topics.
bcye 2y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
ChrisArchitect 2y ago
(tries to find keystroke for Fediverse symbol) ⁂ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41327567 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41327567
- bee_rider 2y ago
  Spiky therefore symbol?
- Zefiroj 2y ago
  star-triforce
- proactivesvcs 2y ago
  (tried to use Compose key, had to find out how to add Compose sequences) ⁂
idatum 2y ago
If I understand Threads adoption, it is quite large compared to Mastodon. Will Mastodon be able to handle the load if Threads -- a commercial entity -- is not blocked? I'm holding off on making the cynical conclusion about Threads' motivations.

179 points by mkarliner 2y ago

mort96 2y ago

[flagged]

jensensbutton 2y ago
How is that your takeaway? Seems like the opposite of what's being said.
- mort96 2y ago
  You're right, I read it as "disables" rather than "enables". That's on me, sorry.
empath75 2y ago
They're taking it slow at least in part because there were concerns about threads traffic overwhelming mastodon servers.
- krapp 2y ago
  That shouldn't be a huge problem - many Mastodon servers are already blocking Threads by default.
  - dewey 2y ago
    Most people are probably on the 3 biggest instances and the "official" instances don't have it blocked as far as I can see (https://blog.joinmastodon.org/2023/07/what-to-know-about-threads/ https://blog.joinmastodon.org/2023/07/what-to-know-about-thr...). Blocking also seems like a silly thing for a network that is about being open and interoperable.
    - mkarliner 2y ago
      Quite, and, as I said in my post, I think we (the Fediverse) owe it to the rest of the Internet to enable the deconstruction of the current social media landscape as much as possible.
    - krapp 2y ago
      The protocol is open and interoperable. I can't build a Facebook but nothing is stopping Mark Zuckerberg from building a platform on ActivityHub. But there would be no point to a federated network if every node were required to accept traffic from all other nodes. That's just centralization with extra steps.. and centralized social media is what most people who move to federated networks are trying to avoid, to say nothing of the cost burden on smaller instances to handle all of that traffic. A lot of people block the big instances as well for similar reasons.
    - immibis 2y ago
      Is blocking spam a silly thing?
      - dewey 2y ago
        No, but "spam" is subjective and while you can decide that for your own instance, doing it for a bigger instance on behave of your users seems a bit overreaching...but luckily I can just move to an instance where I agree with the rules or host my own.
    - immibis 2y ago
      Is blocking spam a silly thing? (Google Groups was to Usenet what Threads is to ActivityPub, and it got collectively blocked by all Usenet servers for spam, then decided to shut down.)

lolinder 2y ago

> Because I believe that Meta as a whole is moving to an open systems approach, not because Mark Zuckerberg is a nice guy, but because he is smart enough to go open before he is forced to by regulators, (or broken up). I think it's both more than that and less than that. Unless I missed some news, Meta's newfound love for product openness has only really manifested in Llama and Threads—I haven't seen any evidence of shifts in their core products. I think what's happened is that in both cases Meta knows that they don't really stand a chance of actually unseating the big players in that segment on their own, but that Meta can make a dent in their profit margins if they can dilute the value of owning that segment. Llama is squarely targeted at preventing anyone from owning AI. I think Threads is doing the same thing with microblogging. If Meta can't own a segment they're going to make darn sure that no one else can own it and use their profits from it to push Meta out of their core. If it also makes the company look more palatable to regulators, that's a nice side effect, but I'm not sure it would work as the primary goal.

mkarliner 2y ago
Well, personally I think that Meta is taking the threat of regulator action very seriously. You only have to look at how Google and Apple are in trouble. Owning WhatsApp, Threads and Instagram makes them a big target for breakup. And an open system defuses that significantly.
- lolinder 2y ago
  > And an open system defuses that significantly. I'm not sure that it has as much of an impact as you think it does. Threads would not be a significant target for regulator action regardless of openness—it doesn't have enough share of the market to be interesting. Meanwhile, the openness of Threads does nothing to alleviate the concerns of their dominance in every non-microblogging social media category.
  - mkarliner 2y ago
    Meta could link Threads and Instagram in a heartbeat if they chose, and were't scared of the consequences. Threads is small fry at the moment, but a very good test and precursor to making the same play across the other properties. I respect your opinion BTW, I don't like flame wars. :-) It's worth remembering that the Fediverse is not just microblogging, there are platforms for pretty much every kind of social media play.

theanonymousone 2y ago

Still not in Europe?

red_trumpet 2y ago
Care to elaborate? It looks like Threads is available in Europe.
- theanonymousone 2y ago
  In Switzerland,I don't see the setting to ensble Fediverse for my Threads account. Also I cannot find @myusername@threads.net in Mastodon.
hn1986 2y ago
These fediverse changes in Threads are in Europe but not in the EU yet. Threads itself is available worldwide, including the EU.
- mkarliner 2y ago
  Yes, I'm in the UK, works here. I'd give up Threads to be back in the EU :-)

draxil 2y ago

OFC most of the fediverse has blocked threads already.

bitcharmer 2y ago
And for a very good reason
pixxel 2y ago
Seems reasonable. You stay in the Zuckerberg ecosystem and we’ll cut off its parasitic tentacles.
jaredcwhite 2y ago
Not sure where you're coming up with that. I'm aware of the "Fedipact" but I'd guess it comprises a fairly small percentage of users, and some users have taken steps to leave instances which block Threads.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

kmfrk 2y ago

Tumblr's been talking about the move for ages, but does anyone knoe what progress is being made towards it?

sunaookami 2y ago
I guess they want to finish the transition to WordPress first, since WordPress also has an ActivityPub plugin https://automattic.com/2024/08/27/shipping-tumblr-and-wordpress/ https://automattic.com/2024/08/27/shipping-tumblr-and-wordpr...

jmyeet 2y ago

I've been intrigued by Threads since it launched last year. Succeeding where there's a competitor as entrenched as Twitter is nigh on impossible. The network effect is massive. But of course there are chinks in TWitter's armor, specifically the whole blue check debacle and that Twitter itself is rapidly becoming 4chan (or even 8chan) and advertisers are understandably fleeing. Still, the chance of success isn't great. Launching it under the iG brand was probably a good idea, better than under Facebook at least. Still, when it comes to open source and integration with third-parties I keep thinking of the quote "open source is for losers" (that might come from this [1]), meaning all but the dominant player embrace interoperability and open source in a desperate attempt to topple the dominant player. I have no idea what usage looks like but I'm glad they haven't given up. I know Google would've canceled it by now (and probably replaced it with something that looks kinda similar, has a different name/branding but no compatibility with the old thing, if chat apps are anything to go by). I still say federation is something tech people care about but offers nothing of tangible value to end users. There hasn't been a successful federated technology since email. For a reason. [1]: https://siliconangle.com/2014/05/29/only-loser-vendors-are-truly-committed-to-open-source/ https://siliconangle.com/2014/05/29/only-loser-vendors-are-t...

mkarliner 2y ago
The entire mobile phone network?
- loeg 2y ago
  That predates email and is ... not really a counterpoint to federation sucking for end-users? There's so much spam/phishing and somehow it's no one's legal responsibility.
  - yborg 2y ago
    Yeah that happens now on Xitter, that doesn't seem to be a federation problem.
  - nordsieck 2y ago
    Exactly. I know so many people who simply don't respond if the incoming call isn't in their address book.

wazoox 2y ago

"Embrace, Extend, and Extinguish".

crowcroft 2y ago

Would love to know how many people on threads interact with the fediverse beyond threads. I know it’s still early and features are being built out, but my guess is the number is close to 0.

mkarliner 2y ago
Again, not really the point. So long as Meta can say their platforms are open, they have a bulwark against regulators and/or being broken up. It really doesn't matter to them if it's popular or not.
- crowcroft 2y ago
  I would go as far as to say they don't really want it to be popular, but I would love to see enough integration for there to be at least some attempt at competition.
jaredcwhite 2y ago
There's lots of Fediverse interaction on Threads. It's a little tricky still because you can follow Threads users from other instances but you can't follow accounts on other instances from Threads. That being said, I see lots of people (myself included) boosting, liking, and even commenting on Threads content from elsewhere in the Fediverse. And now that Threads has just started to publicly show fedi comments on Threads (not just to the OP), we'll get a better sense of engagement on any given post.

xyst 2y ago

What's the true goal here? Given the decentralized aspect of the fediverse, facebook won't be able to sell ad space here. Is threads hoping to become "the" instance in the fediverse? Then they can impose their will across the rest of the fediverse. threads: "oh, you have a single user instance and want to federate with us? Pay us $500 per user/year, and use our preferred server which allows us to sell ad space on your server"

klysm 2y ago
Embrace extend extinguish ?
- dahauns 2y ago
  Entice, Entrench, Enshittify.
- takeda 2y ago
  Exactly https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-netwo...
nunobrito 2y ago
Algorithms. Right now fediverse is growing and has very honest algorithms. Once Meta is on the scene, their "decentralized" timeline will look more enticing than others. It will be captivating and you'll prefer to hangout on their server with all nice extensions that just work there. With time, +90% of users won't bother looking on small isolated islands and you'll have facebook 2.0 in place. Anyways, it is a fair fight. Meta coming to fediverse already means that things on this side are interesting.
nordsieck 2y ago
> Is threads hoping to become "the" instance in the fediverse? Probably > Then they can impose their will across the rest of the fediverse. Nah. The play at that point would be to just discontinue support for federation and lock all their users inside the new walled garden.
2y ago

renewiltord 2y ago

> not because Mark Zuckerberg is a nice guy Mark Z was clear on Dwarkesh's podcast that when he has things open he does so because he thinks it will benefit Meta and he explicitly says it's not altruistic and that if it stops being useful he'll stop making things open.

nunobrito 2y ago

Just wait until they discover NOSTR.

greentea23 2y ago
Nostr makes so much more sense to me than the fediverse because your account is not bound to a particular server, so if your admin gets bored you can simply use other relays or host your own instead of being kicked off. And with this you get pretty significant fediverse interop: https://gitlab.com/soapbox-pub/mostr https://gitlab.com/soapbox-pub/mostr
- nunobrito 2y ago
  I've been around BBS, web forums and social networks for almost 30 years now. Indeed NOSTR is completely fresh air and mindblowing. My account just works across any clients, doesn't need even need Internet nor electricity. I can print my note on a piece of paper and people can still verify that this is a verifiable text from me. Really in love with the tech, didn't had this feeling for quite a while.

JohnMakin 2y ago

I think this is great. I've been using threads for 6 months, and while I was never a prolific twitter user - I thought it sucked even before the elon purchase, now, it's entirely unusable to me (and I've tried) - I do like its interface, a seemingly "light" (by meta standards) approach to moderation, and now a step in this direction I think is a really good thing. As to the "why" I think it's fairly obvious. If they integrate with everything, they'll eventually become the defacto platform and/or steer users and engagement to their other platforms with less friction.

downWidOutaFite 2y ago
As an advocate for peace in Gaza the moderation has been anything but light. Can't even use the word zionist on there.
- JohnMakin 2y ago
  Yea, this is a platform-wide thing and across most other platforms as well - I meant in terms of like, forcing you to edit posts with "forbidden" keywords like they love to do on IG (but never tell you exactly what you said wrong), tone policing, hiding comments between users arguing with each other, etc.
- kameit00 2y ago
  You could use the fediverse directly instead of Threads if you don't want to be 'over-moderated'. Some server admins in the fediverse also go over board, but you can host your own instance in the fediverse or search for an instance that align with your topics.

bcye 2y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

ChrisArchitect 2y ago

(tries to find keystroke for Fediverse symbol) ⁂ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41327567 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41327567

bee_rider 2y ago
Spiky therefore symbol?
Zefiroj 2y ago
star-triforce
proactivesvcs 2y ago
(tried to use Compose key, had to find out how to add Compose sequences) ⁂

idatum 2y ago

If I understand Threads adoption, it is quite large compared to Mastodon. Will Mastodon be able to handle the load if Threads -- a commercial entity -- is not blocked? I'm holding off on making the cynical conclusion about Threads' motivations.