The most they can do is add a load of more users to the fediverse then take them away again. For them to successfully EEE the fediverse, it would require convincing existing fediverse users to switch to threads. I cannot see that happening on here on any noticeable scale.
If anything, Bluesky is the bigger threat as it touts itself as “decentralised” in order to gain users who would have otherwise gone to Mastodon, then easily pull the plug.
“EEE” doesn’t really make sense in this context, and even if there was some way for Meta to affect non Meta-owned instances- ActivityPub is an open protocol and Meta is allowed to use it however they want.
The most they can do is add a load of more users to the fediverse then take them away again. For them to successfully EEE the fediverse, it would require convincing existing fediverse users to switch to threads. I cannot see that happening on here on any noticeable scale.
Na, they were quite explicit what their plan is: they realized that there are interesting “content creators” on the fediverse, and that many other “content creators” are eying the fediverse and similar platforms as a way to have more control over the platform they use. And ultimately users will follow the creators, once the creators are sufficiently fed up with being taken hostage by facebook etc. So they are willing to let the creators switch to the fediverse, but want to retain the users as ultimatly that is where their revenue is coming from via advertisement and data harvesting.
Mind you, I fully agree with you on Bluesky, but I think Threads really isn’t much different.
For example, say this integration is fully accomplished. Fediverse users wouldn’t have a real reason to switch to Threads, but because Threads is a much larger platform all future users are gonna go there, and not to the rest of the Fediverse. That, already, I think is an issue. Then, because it’s a bigger platform, most communities are gonna start to be populated mostly by Threads users - simply because numbers rule. The 2nd E comes into play: extend. The protocols are extended. At first, it might not be enough to switch - just some quality of life changes, maybe - but the more stuff is added, the more the experience for the Threads users - aka, the majority of the users on any given community on the Fediverse - starts to diverge from the rest of the users. Now, at this point, a Fediverse user has two choices: either ignore this, or switch. Sure, many will just ignore it - the people on the Fediverse right now are the kind of people that would tend to ignore that, anyway - but plenty won’t, because it’s SOCIAL media. SOCIAL! If your experience differs significantly from your peers, that will bother you, and you will want to change, especially if you’re in the crushing minority.
Embrace, extend, extinguish.
Hey, maybe I’m wrong! Hopefully, even. However, I do see it happening. Hope I got my point across.
How come these accusations aren’t thrown at piefed? Like it’s almost the exact same thing as lemmy just with more features like multi-community feeds, which could entice users over to piefed and leave current lemmy behind.
Or is EEE only EEE if it’s a corporation doing it?
Edit: I’m legit asking, I objectively don’t understand the difference between the two unless we’re taking motive into account? But that’s hard to prove motive either way.
It’s only EEE if it’s an entity that could be reasonable expected to do it.
Sure, Piefed could adopt ActivityPub, extend it with proprietary capabilities, and then use that to strongly disadvantage its competitors. However, Piefed is a fully open-source project without ads or any money-making aspect at all, started by some random dude from New Zealand. Not exactly prime EEE grounds, you know?
Basically, yes. EEE is a strategy developed by a dominant company whose revenue stream came from paid proprietary software and services but which embraced open standards with the goal of vanquishing the threat to their business model posed by that openness and maintaining/recovering their proprietary domination.
Does ActivityPub being open and used by many different projects & organizations pose a threat to Piefed’s business model? Is Piefed a powerful company that built that power on a proprietary model and seeks to preserve that power by embracing, extending, and extinguishing ActivityPub? With the goal of maintaining/recovering proprietary domination?
Yes, EEE is the software version of abusing your market dominance which may have been obtained via innovation (i.e. when Apple launched the iPhone) or enhancement of an already existing good or service (i. e. Lemmy).
They’ve been doing it for quite a while. Very slowly. The problem is it’s currently unidirectional, and opt-in. I imagine its the same reason Apple has adopted RCS (also opt-in): legal pressure.
If they just ignore it completely, legislators might completely fuck them like they did Apple with alternative payments. But if they kinda half-ass it then they can point to it and say “SEE, WE HAVE INTEROP! NO MONOPOLY!”
Honestly, I thought Meta talking about Fediverse integration was just marketing bullshit. Are they really doing it? 🤔
EEE, sorry.
The most they can do is add a load of more users to the fediverse then take them away again. For them to successfully EEE the fediverse, it would require convincing existing fediverse users to switch to threads. I cannot see that happening on here on any noticeable scale.
If anything, Bluesky is the bigger threat as it touts itself as “decentralised” in order to gain users who would have otherwise gone to Mastodon, then easily pull the plug.
“EEE” doesn’t really make sense in this context, and even if there was some way for Meta to affect non Meta-owned instances- ActivityPub is an open protocol and Meta is allowed to use it however they want.
Na, they were quite explicit what their plan is: they realized that there are interesting “content creators” on the fediverse, and that many other “content creators” are eying the fediverse and similar platforms as a way to have more control over the platform they use. And ultimately users will follow the creators, once the creators are sufficiently fed up with being taken hostage by facebook etc. So they are willing to let the creators switch to the fediverse, but want to retain the users as ultimatly that is where their revenue is coming from via advertisement and data harvesting.
Not sure that’s right.
Mind you, I fully agree with you on Bluesky, but I think Threads really isn’t much different.
For example, say this integration is fully accomplished. Fediverse users wouldn’t have a real reason to switch to Threads, but because Threads is a much larger platform all future users are gonna go there, and not to the rest of the Fediverse. That, already, I think is an issue. Then, because it’s a bigger platform, most communities are gonna start to be populated mostly by Threads users - simply because numbers rule. The 2nd E comes into play: extend. The protocols are extended. At first, it might not be enough to switch - just some quality of life changes, maybe - but the more stuff is added, the more the experience for the Threads users - aka, the majority of the users on any given community on the Fediverse - starts to diverge from the rest of the users. Now, at this point, a Fediverse user has two choices: either ignore this, or switch. Sure, many will just ignore it - the people on the Fediverse right now are the kind of people that would tend to ignore that, anyway - but plenty won’t, because it’s SOCIAL media. SOCIAL! If your experience differs significantly from your peers, that will bother you, and you will want to change, especially if you’re in the crushing minority.
Embrace, extend, extinguish.
Hey, maybe I’m wrong! Hopefully, even. However, I do see it happening. Hope I got my point across.
How come these accusations aren’t thrown at piefed? Like it’s almost the exact same thing as lemmy just with more features like multi-community feeds, which could entice users over to piefed and leave current lemmy behind.
Or is EEE only EEE if it’s a corporation doing it?
Edit: I’m legit asking, I objectively don’t understand the difference between the two unless we’re taking motive into account? But that’s hard to prove motive either way.
It’s only EEE if it’s an entity that could be reasonable expected to do it.
Sure, Piefed could adopt ActivityPub, extend it with proprietary capabilities, and then use that to strongly disadvantage its competitors. However, Piefed is a fully open-source project without ads or any money-making aspect at all, started by some random dude from New Zealand. Not exactly prime EEE grounds, you know?
Basically, yes. EEE is a strategy developed by a dominant company whose revenue stream came from paid proprietary software and services but which embraced open standards with the goal of vanquishing the threat to their business model posed by that openness and maintaining/recovering their proprietary domination.
Does ActivityPub being open and used by many different projects & organizations pose a threat to Piefed’s business model? Is Piefed a powerful company that built that power on a proprietary model and seeks to preserve that power by embracing, extending, and extinguishing ActivityPub? With the goal of maintaining/recovering proprietary domination?
No. So it ain’t EEE.
Yes, EEE is the software version of abusing your market dominance which may have been obtained via innovation (i.e. when Apple launched the iPhone) or enhancement of an already existing good or service (i. e. Lemmy).
They’ve been doing it for quite a while. Very slowly. The problem is it’s currently unidirectional, and opt-in. I imagine its the same reason Apple has adopted RCS (also opt-in): legal pressure.
If they just ignore it completely, legislators might completely fuck them like they did Apple with alternative payments. But if they kinda half-ass it then they can point to it and say “SEE, WE HAVE INTEROP! NO MONOPOLY!”
Its a bit charitable to call threads a monopoly since no one uses it.
I honestly doubt that, It has no relevance – at all. I see screenshots of bluesky posts everywhere, but rarely see threads posts.
You’re giving me anecdotes and I’m giving you statistics.