• Nougat@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    126
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    If Meta is running a fediverse instance, they’re doing it for money. Sure, I might be able to block Meta-sourced content from reaching me, but that doesn’t prevent me-sourced content from reaching Meta - where they can monetize it.

    Show me how to do that, and I’m on it like white on rice.

    • :fatpikachu: ninboy@mastodon.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      56
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      @Nougat It doesn’t prevent them now, as they can just easily crawl all of your posts on here because you are posting on a *public instance*. Defederating from them does nothing to make your public content private.

      • Nougat@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        1 year ago

        @ninboy No, it doesn’t make my public content private, but it would display my content alongside everything else that a threads user would see, which would make Meta’s product more attractive to threads users. Increased threads userbase means increased ad revenue. Speaking of which, I’m now thinking about how content I created, not on a Meta-operated site, would be (as federation by default intends) displayed next to Meta advertising on their instance. My ability to prevent me-sourced content from reaching Meta’s instance prevents me-sourced content from displaying next to advertisement I don’t want it to be displayed next to.

          • Nougat@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            @ninboy Sure, you’re not going to close that “analog hole,” but in a case like that, the audience is aware that the content isn’t from the site they’re on. Me- (and you- and everyone-)sourced content appearing on a Meta site as though it was Meta content would carry some things to have real concerns about.

            Of course, this is all really new(ish), so it’s possible that a future internet audience will have a better awareness of how federation works, and bring that understanding with them while they browse. On the other hand, have you seen people?

            Tangent: You tagged me in your original reply, which made me wonder why, and if I should do the same thing. Checking your username, I see you’re on from mastodon.social, and here I am via kbin.social. I think this is my first real interplatform conversation like that, and I think it’s really cool.

      • DarthCluck@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Neat, but it still means nothing. You’re still posting in a public forum. You can copyright or watermark your work, but fair use is a two way street.

      • Spzi@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        There is “messages or messages” in the middle, might want to change that.

        Where would this be posted or stored to have legal effects?

        Is there a text version available for others to copy?

        • tech@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          32
          ·
          1 year ago

          I printed it out and put it on the front door of my house. The castle doctrine means that this is enforced against all internet companies I use in my house.

          • TechnoBabble@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            You make a good point.

            Under the Castle Doctrine laws in my state, if Zuckerberg walked into my house without being invited then I could start blastin.

            I’ll post the legalese mumbo jumbo on my door to keep him out, like he’s a vampire.

      • blazarious@mylem.me
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        How is this legally binding? I still remember when people posted similar stuff all over Facebook. It means nothing.

    • MiscreantMouse@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is exactly my concern, I don’t want my online activity to become another revenue stream for meta. If they can put ads next to our posts then we’re back to working for free for the billionaires.

        • MiscreantMouse@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          1 year ago

          The issue is the stuff I post being monetized by Zuck et al. I’m not interested in providing free content for billionaires.

        • fernandofig@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          If I understand correctly, the concern is not for the users on Meta’s “Threads”. It’s the fact that the content you create on Mastodon or whatever fediverse part with which Meta federated would eventually reach users on Threads, and thus “you” (on the fediverse corner outside of Meta) are indirectly monetized.