That’s part of why I clicked the article, I was confused if I read it correctly

The article is nice, but I’m not sure if I’d send it to friends that aren’t familiar with the fediverse. It seems to gloss over some problems and focus less relevant ones

It doesn’t touch on the issues with Blueskys protocol and makes it sound like an equivalent choice (or worse, a better choice). In the downsides section it touches on racism in badly moderated instances, and the difficulty of setting up an instance. Those issues aren’t relevant to the vast majority of users who will join a large instance that has defederated from the bad stuff.

It’s a nice article for those who are already somewhat familiar, but a bad first impression

Very cool, thank you!

This is both really cool, and really unsettling. I wonder if this research might help in the other direction as well, such as with transplants and grafts

sarcasm is already hard to understand online, even harder for generative AI

I know sometimes I would take a peek at the person’s comment history to see if they were well informed / a shill for the product. The AI can’t do that

The pioneers used to ride them for miles

What I hate to see, even in this thread, is people turning on each other in this “us vs. them”, “you’re either a part of the pact or you’re against us” nonsense

Let’s all remember why WE ALL CHOSE to get on the fediverse and build it. The strength of the fediverse comes from the freedom for each instance to choose how to run things. My understanding is that no one in an instance is harmed if some other instance chooses to federate or defederate from Threads.

I hate Meta. I also know that Meta doesn’t need to do anything to take down the fediverse if we do it ourselves.

I don’t want to use their platform, but I get why some people might choose to stay federated so that there is incentive to pull people to mastodon and educate people about the issues

There’s enough nuance there that I’m not dead set on either side, and I think we still have the chance to defederate later if there’s an increase in spam and harmful content / disinformation.

That one is actually public record, with

• Facebook using their influence to set up in the country in a way that made it the dominant form of internet access for the country, enough that a large number of people considered Facebook=internet

• Facebook getting multiple reputable warnings about what was happening on the platform, what their advertising policies and algorithms were encouraging, and they chose to not act on them and instead continued to profit from it

• They finally did act after a whole lot of harm was done

I don’t think that’s what they’re saying.

They’re saying that some users and admins might choose to wait and see

Great thing about the fediverse

People get to decide what they want from their platform

This isn’t as helpful, but I’ve taken advantage of a second monitor in cases like this. It’s vertical so I can usually grab a lot more in the single screenshot.

You could temporarily flip your screen sideways if that helps, but again this is an annoying workaround to something that could have an easy solution

Now I’m even more confused 😄

The explanation was probably fine, I just can’t wrap my head around it