So I saw a recent post on lemmy from admins of another instance, forgive me for not remembering which, where they posted a full transparency update on Meta requesting a meeting with the admins of that instance. The admins declined, and then shared the correspondence with their community via screenshots of the original email from meta and their response.

My question is did @ruud@lemmy.world or any other lemmy.world admins get a similar invite, and if so, did you accept/attend?

I’m curious, because as far as I know lemmy.world has not made their stance on defederation from meta/threads very clear, not even to say that they weren’t sure or didn’t have a stance yet.

So, lemmy.world admins, If you did attend this off the record meeting, I’m sure they have some sort of agreement with you that the discussion stays off the record… But could you at least confirm or deny if you were invited to and/or attended such a meeting?

Edit: it was mastodon instance admins for Fosstodon here’s a link: https://fosstodon.org/@kev/110592625692688836 but my question still stands and I think the lemmy.world community deserves an answer.

  • Candelestine@lemmy.worldEnglish
    291·
    1 year ago

    I’ve read it, and I do find the position concerning. They focus heavily on technical threats to the system, but nobody discusses how a skilled businessman can outmaneuver them it what is fundamentally a competitive commercial environment.

    • nekat_emanresu@lemmy.mlEnglish
      24·
      1 year ago

      Exactly! Almost every time I’ve tried to talk with people they only bring up those same technical aspects and ignore the other aspects, like cultural destruction and manufactured outrage and hatred against LGBTQs etc that comes with meta/facebook. The whole internet doesn’t need to be a homogenized mess :(

      Political and business maneuvers will catch IT focused security people by surprise. They are fish in a barrel

      • Candelestine@lemmy.worldEnglish
        42·
        1 year ago

        Those are all more techy stuff. Let me know when someone addresses bribery, using their legal system as a weapon or countering marketing campaigns.

          • Candelestine@lemmy.worldEnglish
            24·
            1 year ago

            I’ve read it twice now. Bribery? Not once. Lawsuits? Not in there. Marketing strategy? Also not in there.

            You want to actually explain what I’m supposed to be seeing? EEE is just more techy bullshit.

            • jocanib@lemmy.worldEnglish
              5·
              1 year ago

              The 3rd argument for defederation:

              ➡️ To defend against being “Embraced, Extended, and Extinguished.”

              This is a real risk, and others point to Google and Facebook and XMPP, or Google and RSS Google reader. Where a big entity takes over, then rug pulls or extends an open standard slowly into a non-standard, non-interoperable functionally siloed service.

              This is a real risk. But you don’t - and can’t - defend against this by defederation.

              Why not? Because even if the entire existing Fedi pre-blocked them. Instagram has 1.6 BILLION users. If they push this, in one day just on their own they will be the size of the current Fedi’s monthly user base, and then grow from there.

              Virtually Instantly, they become the biggest ActivityPub entity on the planet. With or without a mass block.

              Some instances defederating is precisely what should happen. But all instances defederating is committing suicide to avoid being murdered.

              • Candelestine@lemmy.worldEnglish
                32·
                1 year ago

                … that is not one of the three things I was describing.

                And how does everyone pre-emptively defederating lead to our death anyway? How does it kill us?