What an asinine concern. Don’t want your data on threads? Don’t use threads.
[deleted]
Blocking Threads won't be enough to protect privacy once they join the Fediverse
31–40 of 458 posts
Re: Blocking Threads won't be enough to protect privacy once they join the Fediverse
#32What an asinine concern. Don’t want your data on threads? Don’t use threads.
The article shows that federation delivers data to Meta even if you personally don't use Threads, but I agree with your point.
If you want to control distribution of your data, don't join a federation designed to distribute data. Trying to blacklist nodes in a graph that you don't control is not a solution.
Information wants to be free, if you post something to a social graph assume everyone in the graph can see it forever.
Re: Blocking Threads won't be enough to protect privacy once they join the Fediverse
#33Re: Blocking Threads won't be enough to protect privacy once they join the Fediverse
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even if you don't use Threads, when they eventually add ActivityPub support, Mastodon users' data will inevitably be harvested. Instance admins have been signing a pact[1] to defederate with Meta for this reason, in addition to the fact that they don't trust Meta to moderate their instance well enough for it to be safe to federate with. [1] https://fedipact.online/
I find it hard to believe they are really going to join the Fedi. With 100 million users on Threads and maybe 2 million on the Fedi, how could Meta possibly benefit? Federating could bring them trouble but no benefit.
The EU digital markets act will require "gatekeepers" like meta to provide some form of interoperability or open access. Supporting activitypub would be a way to satisfy that requirement.
Re: Blocking Threads won't be enough to protect privacy once they join the Fediverse
#35What an asinine concern. Don’t want your data on threads? Don’t use threads.
Isn't the exact concern here that people avoid Meta properties and for that reason chose Mastodon, but now Meta is sucking that data in? To me that still seems fairplay on a platform that's designed to be open and heralded that way. Not a opinion I hold strongly though.
[deleted]
Re: Blocking Threads won't be enough to protect privacy once they join the Fediverse
#36"Decentralized access for everyone, unless it gets popular enough that somebody actually wants to interop with it" I understand the Meta hate, but joining a very explicitly public and intentionally republishable service and then being unhappy that your data is public and intentionally republishable is bizarre to me.
> joining a very explicitly public and intentionally republishable service and then being unhappy that your data is public Comparing the sheer amount of data that Meta/Facebook vacuums up to the privacy practices of similar apps is instructive. https://www.wired.com/story/meta-twitter-threads-bluesky-spi...
This feels like another instance of seeking a technical solution to a legal problem
Re: Blocking Threads won't be enough to protect privacy once they join the Fediverse
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even if you don't use Threads, when they eventually add ActivityPub support, Mastodon users' data will inevitably be harvested. Instance admins have been signing a pact[1] to defederate with Meta for this reason, in addition to the fact that they don't trust Meta to moderate their instance well enough for it to be safe to federate with. [1] https://fedipact.online/
I find it hard to believe they are really going to join the Fedi. With 100 million users on Threads and maybe 2 million on the Fedi, how could Meta possibly benefit? Federating could bring them trouble but no benefit.
I could definitely see a benefit for them from a legislative perspective. By federating with other networks, they're able to signal to lawmakers that they're not _really_ a monopoly, they're willing to pay-ball with others.
Also, isn't the 100M user figure disputed, because it's counting existing Instagram users or some such?
Re: Blocking Threads won't be enough to protect privacy once they join the Fediverse
#38What an asinine concern. Don’t want your data on threads? Don’t use threads.
Even if you don't use Threads, when they eventually add ActivityPub support, Mastodon users' data will inevitably be harvested. Instance admins have been signing a pact[1] to defederate with Meta for this reason, in addition to the fact that they don't trust Meta to moderate their instance well enough for it to be safe to federate with. [1] https://fedipact.online/
> when they eventually add ActivityPub support
What does that have to do with anything? Mastodon is explicitly setup to allow all user data to be harvested. What Threads supports or doesn't support in the end has no bearing on Mastodon having all user data public.
Re: Blocking Threads won't be enough to protect privacy once they join the Fediverse
#39If you have personal information you do not wish bad actors to see, do not publish it using an open protocol explicitly designed to allow anyone to read said information.
Defederating from Meta as a solution is stupid - Meta can (and will if they actually care enough) just rejoin undercover.
Furthermore, when it comes to the fediverse, Meta is actually one of the more trusted actors compared to whatever else is on there - at least they're a known legal entity instead of some random.
Finally, the fact that publishing private information publicly on the fediverse wasn't considered an issue before Meta came along shows just how irrelevant the whole thing is - the data has been public all this time, but the network is so irrelevant that not even bad actors cared enough to actually scrape it (or at least do anything with it).
Re: Blocking Threads won't be enough to protect privacy once they join the Fediverse
#40[flagged]