Seriously, what people expected from it?

  • PenguinJuice@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    Could we really be stupid enough to ever let Meta or Facebook back in our lives. We literally just left one hugely greedy CEO and now people are really thinking another one, who has already proved himself an asshole, is going to be different?

    • Talaraine@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 years ago

      Yeah I just really can’t fathom the Meta apologists right now. If that’s the only way to bring a massive number of people to the fediverse I think I’d prefer we stay small.

      Just like Reddit when it started! Build it and they will come! I don’t need instant gratification…I need a rock solid community built on freedom from shareholder bootlicking.

      • hackitfast@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 years ago

        I don’t really understand it. People left Facebook because the way they shifted the platform became less relevant to the younger audiences on it. And then it effectively died.

        Now Meta (literally Facebook rebranded because of how much they fucked up) is creating threads and people just forgot what Facebook did?

        Are people even thinking in the long term what’s going to happen, like what’s happened to reddit, Twitter and Facebook? Does nobody take a step back and take a minute to figure out what’s inevitably going to happen again? It’s bonkers to me.

        It starts with the user base complaining about a platform going to shit, doing nothing about it in the meantime, and when a “viable” replacement pops up it’s another privatized company that wholly plans to do the same exact thing that just happened to the one that’s dying.

        People’s attention spans are 24 hours long.

        • Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 years ago

          People left Facebook and joined Twitter because it’s a pared down version of Facebook with less fluff. Now Threads is a pared down Twitter with less bullshit and fluff (and is actually usable). The fact that Meta made Threads is only relevant because it gives Threads a legitimacy to the average end user that Mastodon doesn’t. People weren’t leaving Facebook because Meta owned it, so there’s no reason for them to care that Meta runs Threads. If Elon didn’t buy Twitter and turn it into a shitshow, Threads would have been DOA.

  • 24Vindustrialdildo@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    American entities love censoring opinions they don’t like. It’s why Lemmy is so great. Parts of the fediverse are likely to exist completely externally to the US corporate “”“community standards”“” which seem primarily to entice other corporate entities to advertise with them.

    • fox@lemmy.fakecake.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      that’s people in general. i’ve seen plenty posts here calling to ban ‘bad’ opinions or defederate instances that allow them.

        • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Something that is important to keep in mind is that Reddit had a mod problem and it wasn’t created by spez, it’s created by some people not being able to have power without abusing it. We must not assume that, since this is a new platform, that there won’t ever be mod problems here.

          Personally, I’d like to see infrastructure for evaluating mods publically. Somewhere you can see a list of their actions after the fact so that people can see for themselves if a mod is acting in good faith. And then, based on that, it can be determined if the admins are acting in good faith by which mods they keep and which they remove. It would also make increasing the number of mods less risky because the problematic ones can be noticed and removed quicker.

        • fox@lemmy.fakecake.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          i’ve lived through the fall of USSR so i consider modern communists incredibly naive but i wouldn’t try denying them their freedom to express themselves.

          as opposed to people who run around calling everyone they disagree with nazis just so that nobody would dare argue against them.

  • henfredemars@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Arguably the fediverse is as free as it can possibly get without forcing other people to listen to you.

    The boundary of the limit of expressing your opinion is directly determined by other people’s willingness to listen. No CEO. No company policy. Just you and the community of users who are willing to listen. The standard is set by users.

    The more you push it, the more extreme your contact becomes, the smaller the community gets, until it’s just you imposing those views on no one but yourself.