• tatterdemalion@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      It really helps to hear a historical perspective on this. The issue is not a matter of, “let’s give them a chance and see how it goes.” It’s more like, “we know this has gone very badly in the past and the incentives are clear for Meta to sabotage us.”

      • u_tamtam@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        yep. And as an XMPP networks op, I wish we had figured-out the technical measures to avoid it in the meantime. Practically, it boils down to preventing a single actor from consolidating a “greater than X” share of the network, while retaining the desirable aspects like “promoting the better services for the most users”.

        • tatterdemalion@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I have had similar thoughts about breaking monopolies in the Fediverse. Similar to a multi-national alliance, it should be possible to have federation-wide agreement that one instance population cannot grow beyond a certain share of the whole, the consequence being defederation. And I think that would include limiting each admin to a single instance within the federation.

          I only fear this rule would be too harsh in practice and penalize the wrong enthusiasts.

          • u_tamtam@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Such an alliance could be the achieved organically by listing-out instances passing a certain set of requirements, like: https://providers.xmpp.net/ , and constraining new joiners to route their account creation through it. But several aspects of this consist of undoing major benefits of decentralization/federation. There’s no free lunch :)

    • erez@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Really good write-up!

      It persuaded me that federating with any corporation is not a good move at such early stages.

    • varsock@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Very informative, thanks for sharing.

      The author is definitely qualified to speak on XMPP and ActivityPub but one thing I noticed is all protocols and technologies mentioned really had no other alternatives for communication. Users flocked because there was nowhere else to go.

      Imagine Lemmy.world was owned by Meta and today decided to federate only with those who paid it.

      It is in the power of users to host their content on instances that will not turn on them - which unfortunately means not holding discourse on monitized instances