• blue_berry@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    But I mean, already lots about the buzz caused around the Fediverse nowadays only EXISTS because Meta anounced to join

    The most obvious thing is: scale. With matter, ActivityPub is finally tried out on a bigger scale. If a global, big fediverse was the goal, this was always one way how it could go. A big player is joining and then, the Fediverse in turn grows and grows with it; just like with the WWW and AOL. What’s your alternative to this?

    Or don’t you want the Fediverse to become a big, global thing where everyone has a Fediverse account and so on?

    • sabreW4K3@lazysoci.al
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      8 months ago

      If you want to write blogs, you need to be objective. The Fediverse is big. Perhaps you should start out by familiarizing yourself with it and why Meta choose it over starting something new.

        • sabreW4K3@lazysoci.al
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          8 months ago

          You’re being lazy. I know you’re better than that. They already have a platform in Facebook. They could do what Spoutible did and buy a Twitter clone to extend it. They could even do what Truth Social did and fork mastodon. They did none of that.

    • poVoq@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Scale in a single closed off data-center does not improve the scaling of the fediverse. In fact it might kill off a lot of smaller fediverse instances and software that arn’t able to keep up with the data-center firehose Meta is pointing at them if they are unlucky. As a result organic growth to scale will likely stop and only those that can throw lots of hardware at the problem will survive.