https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html

Many of us do not trust Facebook and anything it is associated with or swallows up.

EDIT:

https://techcrunch.com/2023/07/05/adam-mosseri-says-metas-threads-app-wont-have-activitypub-support-at-launch/

"Instagram head Adam Mosseri said "

““Soon, you’ll be able to follow and interact with people on other fediverse platforms, such as Mastodon. They can also find people on Threads using full usernames, such as @mosseri@threads.net.””

“We’re committed to building support for ActivityPub, the protocol behind Mastodon, into this app. We weren’t able to finish it for launch given a number of complications that come along with a decentralized network, but it’s coming,” he said.

“If you’re wondering why this matters, here’s a reason: you may one day end up leaving Threads, or, hopefully not, end up de-platformed. If that ever happens, you should be able to take your audience with you to another server. Being open can enable that.”

  • MBM@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Mastodon.social is much bigger than the other instances and it’s headed by the devs (just like kbin.social). This is different from Lemmy, where the spread is more even and the devs purposely don’t want to have the largest instance. Have a good day.

    • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s not what centralized means, nor does it actually affect anything others mentioned. So, good day to you as well I suppose.

      • fiah@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        “centralized” and “decentralized” are a spectrum, not absolutes. Mastodon might be decentralized in theory but if everyone uses a single instance then it’s centralized in practice. That isn’t the case right now, but it’s also not entirely not the case, either. Same is true for lemmy

        • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          This perspective would also make the conversation surrounding it pointless. The proposed idiosyncrasies you suggest don’t change the overall discussion in this thread. It’s a non-actionable perspective. It’s like saying no one can know anything ever. It’s technically philosophically a valid point, but it serves no purpose and doesn’t help in most conversations.