Infosec.Pub

The pact is a declaration of intent to block any Meta-governed instances that try to federate. There are some useful stats here about which, and how many instances have already committed to the pact. All types of Fediverse instances have signed, including some Lemmy instances, though it seems to be especially Mastodon instances that have signed it.

Is this something you have an opinion on, or already made a decision about, @jerry@infosec.pub? Is it something we should discuss as a community?

Meta/Instagram launched a new product called Threads today (working title project92). It adds a new interface for creating text posts and replying to them, using your Instagram account. Of note, Meta has stated that Threads plans to support ActivityPub in the future, and allow federation with ActivityPub services. If you actually look at your Threads profile page in the app your username has a threads.net tag next to it - presumably to support future federation.

Per the link, a number of fediverse communities are pledging to block any Meta-directed instances that should exist in the future. Thus instance content would not be federated to Meta instances, and Meta users would not be able to interact with instance content.

I'm curious what the opinions on this here are. I personally feel like Meta has shown time and time again that they are not very good citizens of the Internet; beyond concerns of an Eternal September triggered by federated Instagram, I worry that bringing their massive userbase to the fediverse would allow them to influence it to negative effect.
I also understand how that could be seen to go against the point of federated social media in the first place, and I'm eager to hear more opinions. What do you think?

Sono curioso di sapere cosa pensano gli admin di feddit.it sul "fedipact", un'informale dichiarazione di intento per defederarsi dalle istanze dei GAFAM, quando appariranno

See below:

cross-posted from: https://beehaw.org/post/798826

although this is unlikely to substantially and directly impact us and is a more immediate concern for Mastodon and similar fediverse software, we've signed the Anti-Meta Fedi Pact as a matter of principle. that pact pledges the following:

i am an instance admin/mod on the fediverse. by signing this pact, i hereby agree to block any instances owned by meta should they pop up on the fediverse. project92 is a real and serious threat to the health and longevity of fedi and must be fought back against at every possible opportunity

the maintainer of the site is currently a little busy and seems to manually add signatures so we may not appear on there for several days but here's a quick receipt that we did indeed sign it.

Frankly, I am leery (due to the 3 Es and will probably be blocking them on Mastodon as I do not think my server will. That being said, I am curious to see what happens and will not do it until I peer into the void... I plan on camping out on Mander either way. :)

If youre a sublem mod or an admin and you haven't checked it out yet, do so :)

A lot of us left reddit because it became too big-corpo'ey. Let's not let another big corpo into our space that we're building so that they can ruin it from the inside

https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html

Especially some kbin instances...

A part of preventing enshittification is preventing corporate EEE, which is itself prevented by preventing corporate access to the Fediverse.

Facebook is planning to join the Fediverse by releasing a Twitter-like service that runs on ActivityPub. This would flood the Fediverse with content (and trolls) from Facebook, allow Facebook to mine data from the Fediverse, and would do irreparable damage to this small part of the internet which has not yet been marred by corporate greed.

Will the admins of this instance agree to block any instance that is set up by Facebook?

Hier gab es schon einen Kommentar dazu, aber ich finde, dass es in dieser Community besser aufgehoben ist.

Das was da betrieben wird, kenne ich eher von GAFAM. Sollte nicht jeder User für sich selbst entscheiden, ob er mit jemandem auf Meta reden möchte oder nicht?

Mit solchen Aktionen begraben wir das Fediverse schneller als es GAFAM könnte!

Um auf den verlinkten Beitrag einzugehen: Was will Meta denn Schlimmes tun?

• alle öffentlichen Beiträge können sie jetzt schon mit einem Bot abgreifen
• alle "privaten" Beiträge können sie auch nicht sehen, wenn sie einen Dienst mit AP Anbindung haben

So, recently some fediverse admins (mostly Mastodon) and the founder of Mastodon, Eugen Rochko (Gargron), where contacted by Meta/Facebook for an NDA meeting. We know nothing about it, but we're pretty sure that it was about this project92 thing that Meta/Facebook is creating to "compete" with Twitter.

So a lot of Mastodon admins already singed a pact to immediately block any Meta/Facebook activity in the fediverse as soon as it comes up. My Mastodon instance, fosstodon.org hasn't singed that pact and I'm pretty worried.

The following image is an screenshot of Gargron and dansup (creator of Pixelfed) talking about this. These posts were deleted, even from the wayback machine.

Es geht darum, dass Meta (Facebook) angekündigt haben, einen neuen Services aufzumachen - quasi Twitter klon, aber mit Fediverse ActivityPub Kompatibilität.

I'm open source Bereich gibt es aber schon viele schlechte Erfahrungen, wo wenn solche Firmen zu große Instanzen besitzen, dass der offene Standard ausgehöhlt wird und misachtet wird (e.g. Internet Explorer als es mehr als 95% der browsers war und Chrome heute).

Interessant, dass sich bereits so viele Instanzen bereits im Vorfeld so positioniert haben.

This is a bit political but i feel this should be looked at. Whatever it's on on the Lemmy instance or the Mastodon instances.

My main concern is about the concept of Embrase Extend Extinguish they could use.