Threads will support ActivityPub. They already have UI elements in place for it in the app (like showing your home server domain on your profile), so there's no reason to believe that isn't their intention. The problem, if any, will be on the other end. Plenty of Mastodon/Fediverse servers have already stated their intention of blocking Meta's access to their networks, so even in the best case the end result will be a fragmented mess.
Not to mention they’ve already held meetings with Fediverse instance admins under NDA about something a while ago [1]. So not only is it their stated plan, they’ve clearly contributed resources to research aswell and still announced the plan after these meetings took place.
Likely certain instances have said they’ll federate with it in the meetings, and for other instances that block them Meta will say “Well your admins are the ones who blocked us! Take your problems up with them” to any users that wish to interact with Threads on their instance.
So a post with no real substance on why it’ll never happen other than “companies lie” yet Mera is out advertising the fact multiple places they will be mastodon compatible including messaging to influencers that their data and followers will be portable. This is likely being done purely from a EU regulatory standpoint but if they were lying about it they wouldn’t be making a big deal about it.
Also likely they see the future of social changing and would rather be the ones steering the standard.
I somewhat agree with you, but you could apply this same logic to Facebook's acquisition of WhatsApp. At the time they "made a big deal about" keeping the app separate from Facebook and maintaining users' privacy, but they were lying.
When was the last time you saw one of these megacorps moving towards decentralization rather than away from it? I can't think of a single example. It seems fair to be skeptical.
Why don’t they do it already, then? They have massive engineering resources. The software Mastodon uses is totally open, not some locked up trade secret that would require years of negotiations.
If Meta wanted to, Threads would already talk to Mastodon.
Baseless speculation is common in HN so it doesn’t surprise me.
Apple creates e2e encryption on a new product and HN screams that we still can’t trust them and we need to live in a fairday cage with zero human contact to truly not be tracked.
Or in this instance when Meta does a reasonable thing and the same people scream that they’re still evil and we can’t trust them and we’re gullible for thinking it’s a good product.
Some people are so anti establishment that they can’t acknowledge a good thing when they see it, I’m afraid.
I think, though, that they - like most of us I'm pretty sure - were assuming that Twitter would not hollow out quite as fast it appears to be, though, I'm taking everything I read with a big ol' shake of salt these days, and frequently there's a shot of medicinal alcohol involved too...
But if the statements purporting to be factual reports are true, the overall story, give or take, seems to be that they were planning to kinda piggyback on Mastodon to pump their numbers up in the early stage, and ideally, kinda deal it a big traffic blow, but maybe that's my cold Meta-hating heart having its say. Then, puffed up on the "easy" acquisition of the unique Mastodon traffic, then move on Musk.
But Musk really seems to be trying to just end the ordeal as quickly as possible at this point, and given that the majority of Twitter people seem to find Mastodon horrid and want a new Twitter, they might just put AP aside for the moment. One can only hope.
If they are going to do it and not back out then they should just put it into a irrevocable clause in their terms of service and promise to delete all user data and send all advertising revenue generated from the user to the user on request if they fail to fulfill their legally binding promise.
If they are committed to it then the clause has no effect. If they do back out and the customer feels betrayed and they feel like Meta lied to them to get them to signup then they can demand Meta to remove their presence and pay the amount Meta made off of them by tricking them.
Simple and clean solution with aligned incentives. If Meta does not intend to back out then they have nothing to lose.
On the threads app it seems clear that they want to support Mastodon in the future, all the usernames have an “@threads.net” label that doesn’t make sense to have unless they are going to support other URL’s in the future.
They have made a concerted effort to build up the groundwork - UI elements that make no sense if you aren't federating and the sign-up prompt explictly mentioning Mastodon. Hell, you've got engineers and management over there still talking about it as if it'll happen.
But you should probably treat it like you should treat phone manufacturers saying the next software update will solve all of the problems - you can only review what you have now, not what'll come in the future.
The current odds on Manifold, a prediction market which uses imaginary internet money (not crypto, real imaginary internet money), are currently 53% for the end of the year.
Easy way to double your imaginary internet money if you're confident of the real answer.
> Mana (Ṁ) is Manifold's play money. Use it to create and bet in questions.
Mana can't be converted into cash, but can be purchased and donated to charity at a ratio of Ṁ100 : $1.
Am I missing something here or are they saying "I'm allowed" to buy my own Mana in order to donate 1% of what I purchased to charity? Doesn't make much sense, or I'm not understanding it at all. I'm betting all my Mana on the latter.
Right but you can express skepticism on HN and get tons of imaginary internet points (karma) right now, whether or not you're right. So what's the point?
We will have to see whether Threads can maintain daily active users the way Twitter and Mastodon can. At the moment, I'm not seeing any activity on Threads that is "native" to Threads, meaning that it isn't just Instagram posts that are cross-posted to this new platform Meta is trying to create. In comparison to BlueSky, I'm not really seeing much out of Threads. It's similar to how Google inflated their G+ numbers by making everyone with a Google Account automatically a G+ user. Hopefully, Meta is not making the same mistakes...
The primary difference being they aren't forcing instagram users to register with Threads - google was very clearly inflating their numbers in a way that threads/meta/facebook currently isn't.
> It's similar to how Google inflated their G+ numbers by making everyone with a Google Account automatically a G+ user
To be clear, it's not like that at all.
Instagram users aren't automatically converted into Threads users. It requires a new app and an affirmative action by the user to create their Threads account using their Instagram login credentials.
I figured connecting to Mastodon would serve as a PoC for tracking and marketing to people there. A kind of hedge that even if the fediverse took off, they could still make money from it.
That frankly sounds like a rather obvious use case for a big corporation. The Fediverse is entirely open, so if a company just creates their own server and follows people from all other servers, they can easily get access to all that open communication.
I've recently been thinking about whether it's possible to add some form of limited distribution using encryption. Perhaps hitch-hiking on WebAuthn public keys? I have no idea if that would work, though.
They don't need to deprecate the connection. Power users that care about privacy will be on Mastodon. Casual users that follow them and don't care because they want a polished experience will remain on Threads.
Meta can have its cake and eat it to by being happy with owning the vast majority of the Fediverse. As a bonus, this appeases regulators.
Personal experience, is that this is extremely user dependent (it is a fair argument that 0 is the correct number of these accounts to ever see).
Much like TikTok [1], Instagram zones in on your preferences, and from my experience, does so with the same mechanism - time spent watching any piece of content.
The best demonstrator for this was a meme I can't find anymore, where some teens held a race to see who saw "coombait" first. Some conked within 10 seconds, some took a full minute (of relentless scrolling, that is) to find it.
While trying to figure what "coombait" means, I found another comment of yours, which is essentially the same as this one, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36637971 That doesn't seem very "novel" :)
Which, also contained the answer to what "coombait" is:
> What is 'coombait'?
> Porn adjacent material. Technically SFW usually but not the kind of thing you want your coworkers seeing you look at.
I don't think I've encountered anyone who thinks Facebook is going to do "a job that is good for customers". I do believe they're going to a pretty _effective_ job of serving their own interests.
Can someone explain what this coombait is? Is it like an anti-porn moral issue? It seems to be more of like a TVTropes-type term when I try to look it up, confused by how people use it on this website.
Everyone seems to ignore that Threads may be interested in the rest of Fediverse: Wordpress and (if it ever integrates) Tumblr. It also secures them easy access to any other potential developments, such as Lemmy.
While Fediverse integration adds moderation complexity, I see few downsides for them to integrate and stay integrated. The portion of Mastodon that hates Facebook seems determined to segregate itself.
Meta has no incentive to add Mastodon/ActivityPub integration ever.
Things like mastodon represent a Jailbreaking of the captive user. If the goal is to monetize the consumer as the product, you could do no worse than to free that consumer from the cattle yard and offer them the ability to graze at their discretion alone.
After Facebook Chat and Google dropped XMPP, I don't think professionals can be expected to believe that support of open standards will happen. It's a simple business move, to lock people in, and recent business history also showed that people don't mind this much, as in, they won't leave for a more open product on this principle alone. So what we can expect is more lock-in.
1. Twitter founder founded BlueSky as he was distressed with things he had to do to get capital and wanted a twitter successor that is community based and funded...hence bluesky's out in the open connection to mastadon via similar protocols.
2. Meta Threads is just way to revitalize FB which has an advertising spying on users upcoming problem with EU out lawing it. Hence Meta's focus on US market solution only.
Supporting ActivityPub can be done in a million ways and Facebook will likely do it in a way where they keep control of users.
If you think they won't, mention something they have done where users remain in control of... anything?
Nope, they want the opposite – for you to stay in the Threads app and get tracked/watch ads. The fact that you can pull content from all over the Fediverse in the app to stay busy is just a bonus. They are now able to monetize all that content for free.
I doubt facebook will want to show ads where they don't have any control over the context that they are shown in due to the insane difficulty of dealing with brand safety once you do that. This is almost certainly a big reason reddit never tried to support advertising in 3rd party clients.
And the larger Mastodon instances aren't going to connect to Threads either:
1) to protect their users from Meta inhaling user data, and as a source of spam, harassment etc. If Threads is not defederated upfront, it would be blocked soon after.
2) The sheer volume from the data from Threads is not going to be manageable.
[+] [-] paxys|2 years ago|reply
Threads will support ActivityPub. They already have UI elements in place for it in the app (like showing your home server domain on your profile), so there's no reason to believe that isn't their intention. The problem, if any, will be on the other end. Plenty of Mastodon/Fediverse servers have already stated their intention of blocking Meta's access to their networks, so even in the best case the end result will be a fragmented mess.
[+] [-] chrisnight|2 years ago|reply
Likely certain instances have said they’ll federate with it in the meetings, and for other instances that block them Meta will say “Well your admins are the ones who blocked us! Take your problems up with them” to any users that wish to interact with Threads on their instance.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36384207
[+] [-] benatkin|2 years ago|reply
That's the second link in the article.
The CEO/founder of Mastodon isn't uniquely positioned to predict Facebook's behavior.
[+] [-] unknown|2 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] dawnerd|2 years ago|reply
Also likely they see the future of social changing and would rather be the ones steering the standard.
[+] [-] burkaman|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] colordrops|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Robotbeat|2 years ago|reply
If Meta wanted to, Threads would already talk to Mastodon.
[+] [-] s3p|2 years ago|reply
Apple creates e2e encryption on a new product and HN screams that we still can’t trust them and we need to live in a fairday cage with zero human contact to truly not be tracked. Or in this instance when Meta does a reasonable thing and the same people scream that they’re still evil and we can’t trust them and we’re gullible for thinking it’s a good product.
Some people are so anti establishment that they can’t acknowledge a good thing when they see it, I’m afraid.
[+] [-] jtode|2 years ago|reply
But if the statements purporting to be factual reports are true, the overall story, give or take, seems to be that they were planning to kinda piggyback on Mastodon to pump their numbers up in the early stage, and ideally, kinda deal it a big traffic blow, but maybe that's my cold Meta-hating heart having its say. Then, puffed up on the "easy" acquisition of the unique Mastodon traffic, then move on Musk.
But Musk really seems to be trying to just end the ordeal as quickly as possible at this point, and given that the majority of Twitter people seem to find Mastodon horrid and want a new Twitter, they might just put AP aside for the moment. One can only hope.
[+] [-] Veserv|2 years ago|reply
If they are committed to it then the clause has no effect. If they do back out and the customer feels betrayed and they feel like Meta lied to them to get them to signup then they can demand Meta to remove their presence and pay the amount Meta made off of them by tricking them.
Simple and clean solution with aligned incentives. If Meta does not intend to back out then they have nothing to lose.
[+] [-] tpm|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Shawnj2|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pityJuke|2 years ago|reply
But you should probably treat it like you should treat phone manufacturers saying the next software update will solve all of the problems - you can only review what you have now, not what'll come in the future.
[+] [-] dannyobrien|2 years ago|reply
Easy way to double your imaginary internet money if you're confident of the real answer.
https://manifold.markets/tb/will-metas-threads-successfully-...
[+] [-] capableweb|2 years ago|reply
Am I missing something here or are they saying "I'm allowed" to buy my own Mana in order to donate 1% of what I purchased to charity? Doesn't make much sense, or I'm not understanding it at all. I'm betting all my Mana on the latter.
[+] [-] Karrot_Kream|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tomphoolery|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tw04|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] BaseballPhysics|2 years ago|reply
To be clear, it's not like that at all.
Instagram users aren't automatically converted into Threads users. It requires a new app and an affirmative action by the user to create their Threads account using their Instagram login credentials.
[+] [-] bawolff|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bearjaws|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mcv|2 years ago|reply
I've recently been thinking about whether it's possible to add some form of limited distribution using encryption. Perhaps hitch-hiking on WebAuthn public keys? I have no idea if that would work, though.
[+] [-] pclmulqdq|2 years ago|reply
The process would go something like this:
1. Interoperate with Mastodon and onboard users, quietly hoovering up all the data.
2. Wait 12 months to get a userbase.
3. Deprecate the connection to Mastodon, forcing people back into the garden.
[+] [-] jsnell|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tapoxi|2 years ago|reply
Meta can have its cake and eat it to by being happy with owning the vast majority of the Fediverse. As a bonus, this appeases regulators.
[+] [-] pwdisswordfishc|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aranchelk|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hospitalJail|2 years ago|reply
They pushed so much ragebait in 2016-2021 on facebook.
They continue to push so much coombait on IG.
Like, they know how to manipulate us, they have the data.
Wonder what they are going to use to bait people into compulsively checking this new app.
[+] [-] pityJuke|2 years ago|reply
Personal experience, is that this is extremely user dependent (it is a fair argument that 0 is the correct number of these accounts to ever see).
Much like TikTok [1], Instagram zones in on your preferences, and from my experience, does so with the same mechanism - time spent watching any piece of content.
The best demonstrator for this was a meme I can't find anymore, where some teens held a race to see who saw "coombait" first. Some conked within 10 seconds, some took a full minute (of relentless scrolling, that is) to find it.
[1]: https://www.wsj.com/video/series/inside-tiktoks-highly-secre...
[+] [-] capableweb|2 years ago|reply
Which, also contained the answer to what "coombait" is:
> What is 'coombait'?
> Porn adjacent material. Technically SFW usually but not the kind of thing you want your coworkers seeing you look at.
[+] [-] scubbo|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] beepbooptheory|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] leni536|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] MikusR|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] init2null|2 years ago|reply
While Fediverse integration adds moderation complexity, I see few downsides for them to integrate and stay integrated. The portion of Mastodon that hates Facebook seems determined to segregate itself.
[+] [-] nimbius|2 years ago|reply
Things like mastodon represent a Jailbreaking of the captive user. If the goal is to monetize the consumer as the product, you could do no worse than to free that consumer from the cattle yard and offer them the ability to graze at their discretion alone.
[+] [-] unknown|2 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] benatkin|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JohnFen|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|2 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] npteljes|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fredgrott|2 years ago|reply
1. Twitter founder founded BlueSky as he was distressed with things he had to do to get capital and wanted a twitter successor that is community based and funded...hence bluesky's out in the open connection to mastadon via similar protocols.
2. Meta Threads is just way to revitalize FB which has an advertising spying on users upcoming problem with EU out lawing it. Hence Meta's focus on US market solution only.
[+] [-] jarym|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] philwelch|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kabanossen|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bradgessler|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] paxys|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ahahahahah|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] SideburnsOfDoom|2 years ago|reply
1) to protect their users from Meta inhaling user data, and as a source of spam, harassment etc. If Threads is not defederated upfront, it would be blocked soon after.
2) The sheer volume from the data from Threads is not going to be manageable.
So stop pretending that they are.