3 ms·
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" ins
by 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 agoEmbrace extend extinguish ?
- nunobrito 2y agoAlgorithms. 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.
- theptip 2y ago> facebook won't be able to sell ad space here Why not? The Threads client will run ads. If users prefer the experience (integration to other Meta products, QoL, etc.) then they will use it and watch the ads. If they prefer other clients they will use those.
- takeda 2y agoThe goal is basically repeating what Google did with XMPP/Jabber: https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-netwo...
- sangnoir 2y agoIronically, Facebook was also involved with Google defederating from XMPP, according to an explanation I read many years ago (IIRC, from Larry Page when he was CEO). FB messenger could connect to Google Talk users, but not the other way around - so Google wasn't pleased about freely exporting users' "social graph"[1] to Facebook, and getting nothing in return. 1. The "social graph" was the new hotness then, everybody had to have it, just like AI now. An exec at Google convinced the company that Facebook was an existential threat, leading to some very questionable decisions bourne of a self-induced siege-mentality.
- samatman 2y agoIt remains baffling and sad that Google's first response to this was to murder their best social graph in cold blood. Between giving Reader the axe, and the real names fiasco on Google+, the company has destroyed the necessary trust to ever operate a social graph worth having. Please don't tell me that YouTube is a social graph, by the way. Words should mean something. If YouTube were a social graph, I'd see videos from the accounts I follow.
- krapp 2y agoAre you not logged in? I see plenty of videos from the accounts I follow. Youtube is obviously a social graph. Who you follow, and who they follow, how often you interact, whether you comment, etc. directly influences the content that gets recommended to you.
- samatman 2y agoHave you ever tried to DM someone on YouTube?