I love it. There’s a poll ongoing about whether folks would ban a Meta (Instagram/Facebook) instance and people are like “well, I’d give them the benefit of the doubt.”
I really have no words.
Is it learned helplessness? Stockholm Syndrome? Masochism? Something else?
I just don‘t get it.
And here’s what’s saddest: the question itself is moot.
Because mastodon.social wouldn’t block it.
Instead, we’d hear about how Meta joining the fediverse is a Good Thing™.
This would be about a year or so before Meta or some other major instance with major Silicon Valley money displaces mastodon.social as the primary fediverse instance.
At which point maybe a certain someone will realise that legitimising Big Tech-style scale and centralisation is a silly strategy when you’re not Big Tech.
@aral eugen has already expressed his welcome
@aral evidence for my claim:
@edendestroyer @aral Damn, that is so naive. If Meta is exploring ActivityPub, it is not because they don’t see them self as strong, but the opposite. We have been down this road before with XMPP. Meta will adopt ActivityPub. “Everyone” will move to one of Meta’s instances, and at some point, Meta will “improve” or “extend” ActivityPub in an incompatible and proprietary way before dropping it entirely.
@edendestroyer @aral that is if someone doesn't first throw an uncountable amount of money at Eugen that mastodon.social becomes the Trojan horse itself.
@aral @edendestroyer I looked at the link, and he did no such thing.
He says it's a very positive sign and that it validates the protocol and the fediverse.
He said nothing about whether a Meta instance would be allowed or blocked.
I agree that allowing Meta is bad & the discussion is important, but let's stay grounded.