Chris Alemany 🇺🇦🇨🇦🇪🇸 🌱 on Nostr: nprofile1q…wvlvm ok, devil's advocate here. Please hear me out. I personally don't ...
nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpqqg48cy9nkrm0pkeuz7e9zrzeq2n6lnlwyn30u9zd0xe07g9qvrasnwvlvm (nprofile…vlvm) ok, devil's advocate here. Please hear me out.
I personally don't use any Meta product anymore for all the reasons mentioned and more. However, I administer two instances now. Both federating with Threads.
We are here in the #Fediverse, and can see other servers thanks to the #ActivityPub standard.
I also own many domains and run at least a dozen websites running on HTTP standards of course.
There are *a lot* of illegal websites out there. There are even more websites with questionable content including, twitter, facebook, instagram, but also stuff like porn sites, hate sites, nazi sites, spambots, all the rest.
But are my websites compromised by simply existing on the same network without explicit action from day one? Is CBC.ca a lesser organization because it is on the same Internet as pornhub.com and doesn't actively block content from that domain until something actually occurs?
This is how the world wide web has always worked, so why would the open social web be any different?
So bringing this back to Threads (and eventually Bluesky as I think it'll end up in the same place)…. is a Fediverse instance automatically lesser because it exists on the same network as Threads and doesn't actively block content from them until there is cause to do so?
I see maybe 4 or 5 posts from people on Threads in a day on my personal feed. I thought at first that Threads content might overwhelm my public feeds on my server, but it hasn't. What I have seen is not abusive or problematic in any way, it's just normal content.
If at some point the posts emanating from Threads is so overwhelmed with problematic content that it impacts the well being of users on my servers, then of course it would be my responsibility to take action, from banning to outright domain block.
But today? Zuck’s change of policy has had zero impact and there remains good content from people on Threads.
I personally don't use any Meta product anymore for all the reasons mentioned and more. However, I administer two instances now. Both federating with Threads.
We are here in the #Fediverse, and can see other servers thanks to the #ActivityPub standard.
I also own many domains and run at least a dozen websites running on HTTP standards of course.
There are *a lot* of illegal websites out there. There are even more websites with questionable content including, twitter, facebook, instagram, but also stuff like porn sites, hate sites, nazi sites, spambots, all the rest.
But are my websites compromised by simply existing on the same network without explicit action from day one? Is CBC.ca a lesser organization because it is on the same Internet as pornhub.com and doesn't actively block content from that domain until something actually occurs?
This is how the world wide web has always worked, so why would the open social web be any different?
So bringing this back to Threads (and eventually Bluesky as I think it'll end up in the same place)…. is a Fediverse instance automatically lesser because it exists on the same network as Threads and doesn't actively block content from them until there is cause to do so?
I see maybe 4 or 5 posts from people on Threads in a day on my personal feed. I thought at first that Threads content might overwhelm my public feeds on my server, but it hasn't. What I have seen is not abusive or problematic in any way, it's just normal content.
If at some point the posts emanating from Threads is so overwhelmed with problematic content that it impacts the well being of users on my servers, then of course it would be my responsibility to take action, from banning to outright domain block.
But today? Zuck’s change of policy has had zero impact and there remains good content from people on Threads.