As Threads rolls out support for ActivityPub, Meta’s approach is to require each Threads user to manually enable fediverse integration. This was demoed yesterday at FediForum. It’s a perfectly reasonable way to start, and I think the UI that Threads has come up with looks good.
There are problems with opt-in, though, particularly around account migration. Adam Mosseri has spoken about Meta’s long-term goal to use ActivityPub to let users move away from Threads:
…this is an open protocol for social networks so that they can talk to each other, and so you can actually even move eventually your followers from one app to another…
Migrating followers will only work if the followers have enabled fediverse support. Why? The way ActivityPub account migration works, the server holding the user’s account essentially sends a “move” activity to each follower. The follower’s server then updates their reference to point to the new, external server. For Threads, this will presumably do nothing if the follower has not enabled the fediverse, because there will be no way to follow and interact with a user outside of Threads.
So if someone has 100 followers, and only 5% have enabled the fediverse, when that person migrates away from Threads to Mastodon or Micro.blog, for example, only 5 of their followers will automatically follow the new account. This will be quite a big decrease in followers and discourage Threads users from migrating.
It is still early, and I think Threads has been very thoughtful about their approach. Account migration is an area that I hope they will consider more fully. There are ramifications for mixing accounts — some with fediverse support and some without — and long-term it becomes very complicated unless Threads goes all-in on the fediverse.
Pratik But imagine the outrage if they automatically opted everyone in? 😬
Jason McFadden @manton Good points to consider.
Manton Reece @pratik Some people will be outraged no matter what, short of Meta ceasing to exist as a business. 🙂
Simon Woods @pratik Zuckerberg and co have gone out of their way to earn that level of distrust.
Pratik @SimonWoods Yes, and I agree as someone who quit FB in 2017. But what’s next? If they’re embracing open web principles, shouldn’t we accept them albeit cautiously?
💬 John Philpin @pratik it’s an eternal question - yes you were bad - but now you say you have reformed - sure lets give it another go - I means you said you'd only be a dictator for a day.
Pratik @JohnPhilpin Not say you are reformed, but prove you are.
Simon Woods @JohnPhilpin @pratik Oh they should be used to further the ends of strengthening the open web, for sure. I just don't think any distrust and cynicism in the company is unwarranted; for me it's never outraged "no matter what".
TRIGGER WARNING for below: suicide, self-harm.
Here's a reminder that their bullshit continues unabated — it's getting worse whether the trending, short attention span-fuelled, timeline-based herd mind forgets about it or not — even as proof continues to pile up right in front of our faces:
In emails seen by the Observer Rubæk raised the difficulties users faced in trying to report potentially triggering images with Meta in October 2021. In correspondence with Martin Ruby, Meta’s head of public policy in the Nordics, she said she had tried to report an image of an emaciated female but received a message from Instagram saying they did not have enough moderators to look at the image, which stayed on the platform.
In response, Ruby said in November 2021: “Our people are looking at it, but it is not that simple.” In the same email, he mentioned the secret Instagram network that Rubæk had originally criticised, saying that Meta was “taking a closer look”.
But despite its well-documented links to suicides, Rubæk says the network remains up and running today.
Sorry for the long reply. I fucking hate the state of things with all of these situations and I'm never keen to see people giving these other people a pass, not when it costs literally nothing to remember the basic fact that they are doing terrible things with great intent.
//
Dennis Nunes @manton I wish it were opt out, but I do understand that it is a nice move to be opt in (to be honest is much better for them to leave it opt in, also)