Can’t a corporation just enter the space whenever they want to? Can’t they start or even buy out larger instances? Even if Lemmy does take off, wouldn’t this inevitably happen anyway if the space gets popular enough?
“Free” is a simplification. Bad actors can hurt lemmy - however it is also easier for the individual to fight back. If an instance acts unfairly, an individual can choose to ignore that instance and not lose all of Lemmy - they would still have access to all other instances.
Follow up question - if I created my account on an instance, and that instance is a bad actor and disappears (not just defederated, but shuts down), wouldn’t I lose my account and all the content associated with it? Posts, replies, saved stuff, etc? That is my understanding based on another thread.
Assuming so, doesn’t that incentivise people to create their accounts on a large instance like lemmy.world? Let’s be real that 99.99% of people are not going to host their own instance to create their account.
Have multiple accounts across different instances. If you pick a few big ones and a few small ones the likelihood that you get stuck without access to anything one day is infinitesimal.
I have a few accounts right now just because sometimes they go down. At first the thought of having franked accounts bothered me, but without the karma system, why should I care about my individual accounts?
I will never stop until I win my Oscar this year for “Barbie”.
I would have won it easily in 2018 if they named the movie “It’s Hardin’ Time” like I asked them to. “But ooohh, Margot, that name will never catch on, and what do you mean you want your character to ‘Tonya Hardin’ all over Nancy Kerrigan’?”
True genius is never appreciated until it’s too late.
I finally saw a trailer for that movie and it hella reminded me of the Lego Movie. It even has the same actor playing a similar bad guy! If he is named something like “President Business” I will shit my pants laughing.
it’s similar to what’s happening with mastodon right now. there’s something going on with meta (the zuck) getting involved with mastodon.social, the biggest mastodon instance. because of that reason, a lot of people including myself have switched instances or to a different service entirely. it’s an overwhelming ‘no’ for corporations getting involved with federated social media.
Do you have a source for Meta being involved with mastodon.social? That’s highly concerning because the same people that run mastodon.social also run lemmy.world.
Ah, I tried deleting my comment pretty quickly after making it when I did some research and realized I was wrong. The deleted comment must not have updated properly with other Lemmy instances? Lemmy.world is not run by the same people as mastodon.social - you’re right that it’s run by the same people as mastodon.world. I was mistaken.
honestly i don’t have a specific source, it’s more something i found out through hearsay on mastodon.social. personally i’m now part of a calckey instance that’s specifically stated they won’t associate with meta. searching around i found this but nothing concrete.
This is especially relevant right now. Meta (Facebook’s parent company) is just now launching a (heavily) modified Mastodon instance. There is a push to immediately defederate them to keep them out (Source)
There’s a good discussion about it here. But in short, if you allow a single dominant player to exist, they can effectively take over the entire ecosystem
Yes it can happen. But also the Fediverse gives us lots of room/freedom to just move to another instace, create your own, etc. Also as soon as it would become aparent that an instance as been captured, I think most Fediverse users would move away from it. We are not a good target IMO for these greedy mfers.
The biggest problem Lemmy has is funding, and that’s going to be a continual problem.
But it’s like this. Corporations can enter the space and offer their content/servers/communities for free, and people can use those servers. If people want to be on corpo servers, they can choose it, if they don’t they won’t be on one.
If corporations start charging for server, then the other Lemmy servers just don’t pay and restrict access to those servers, people will choose if they want to pay for Lemmy (and go to Lemmy servers who pay, or the corpo servers) or more likely accept it and stop.
But like I said the problem is funding, there needs to be continual funding to run the servers they have, but I believe the goal will be to keep the servers from being bloated pieces of shit like Reddit, and hopefully that means they will be cheaper and maybe can be done through donations.
As for “Can’t they buy out.” Let’s say I’m bad guy business, and I’ll simply offer to hire you or buy your business, you never actually have to work for me, or sell me your business. The only reason something like Activision will sell their business is because Activision because Activision wants to, or really a majority of share holders want to.
Lemmy.world is owned by something or someone. If they don’t want to sell to a corporation they can just choose not to. The problem is Reddit is owned by shareholders, and enough shareholders that they can be taken over.
If someone has 51 percent of reddit (Conde Nast) and someone offers A LOT of money for Reddit, they can still say no… though Conde Nast as a corporation itself has share holders themselves so if they did something stupid (Ignoring an offer for like 2-10x the valuation) those share holders are going to question it… That doesn’t mean Conde Nast HAS to even take a 10x valuation (if they think the site is worth 20x, they obviously wouldn’t) but that’s why Reddit is able to be bought since they have to answer to the share holders and Lemmy theoretically could stay non corporate.
One of the major instances (lemmy.ml? Maybe lemmy.world? I can’t find the post right now) recently posted that they completed a massive spec upgrade for their instance. It was remarkably reasonable, and could very easily be covered by donations. Something like 4 vCPUs and 32GB RAM. Or, failing that, (and I know a lot of people will balk at this), a single non-datamined ad at the top of the page.
Technically it’s not since any corporate entity could set up an instance and join the Fediverse, there’s nothing to stop them. However they could get blacklisted by other instances for whatever reason. For example if Meta were to set up a giant server and plop it on the fediverse, all the admins could collectively say screw those guys and defederate them across the whole thing.
So in that sense there’s no one corporation that could take control. The community is and always will be collectively in control. The philosophy of the Fediverse is FOSS so if a corporate entity tried to monetize an instance, other admins would be pretty quick to block it.
OK, but what if Meta’s instance, due to their vast marketing power, becomes an order of magnitude larger than the rest of the fediverse (I don’t think that’s an unreasonable fear); some instances start federating with it justifying that it brings you both worlds, it becomes an increasingly hard-sell to join those instances not federating with it and they became very niche or die out. Consider how Android started out as a nice neutral FOSS project and, while still technically FOSS, once Google became dominant it became Google spyware.
Many open source projects have died that way, embrace, extend, extinguish. True it’s hard to say for sure that Lemmy and the Fediverse will never fall victim to that. However there’s lots of open source projects that have endured without corporate corruption.
To be fair, AOSP is open-source and free of Google’s services, but said services deliver ecosystem integration - and now even core functionality, as they’re deprecating the stock dialer app.
You say “to be fair” but with full respect I don’t think there’s a fairer way to put it than how I described it as “technically FOSS”. The source is free but does it work to provide freedom to users?
No. Lemmy (and any other FediVerse service) can be targeted for take over from any corporation. But there’s a few things that prevents from thinks like… Idk, Facebook buying Instagram or Musk buying Twitter:
The source code of Lemmy is open. Anyone can just take the code and create another “Lemmy alternative” in case of a buy out.
The underlying protocol (Activity Pub) is open too, and managed by W3C (which manages other things like the HTTP protocol). So I think would be very hard for it to highjack to only work for one company.
You are right, a company can create or buy an instance or another similar service (and probably will, see Threads from Instagram). But they cannot interfere with the other ones. If the instance you’re in was bought and you don’t like the new owners, you can just create another account in another instance and keep following the same communities and content (because of the protocol I mentioned) and having the same experience. Unlike what happened to closed services like reddit that you cannot follow subreddits from here.
Tl;Dr: we are not free of corporate interest, but we have tools to prevent a corporate dominance.
Well I think we’re just about to see, since Meta are about to try something funny.
I fear that simply having all instances agreeing to not federate with Meta won’t be enough, we need something stronger to shut them out, something analogous to copyleft that could enforce a level of openness - but I don’t think we have that. I really hope I’m wrong, I really hope Meta fail with all of their endeavours, but it is a worry.
If you have access to the source code (which you do), the only effective corporate attack against networked software is to convince all your friends not to use the software and to use their proprietary software instead.
So far I think this is the most succinct and correct answer.
In another thread I posted the hypothetical example of a company standing up an instance with a really robust infrastructure (lots of storage, fast and redundant servers, etc). They could use their more significant money and resources to offer things other instances can’t. For example they could attract big names to do AMAs, or they could create communities with huge amounts of useful content that lots of people feel is invaluable. People would be encouraged to make lots of communities there and lots might make it their home instance.
Then, once it’s really entrenched, the company could decide to start charging a subscription for access, or could start serving up ads. It could be painful to walk away from it in a similar way people have felt pain moving away from Reddit. The difference is that, regardless of how big it is, it’s still just one instance among many. You wouldn’t have to walk away from Lemmy, just that instance.
How can they compete in a space where people are already there providing a service without trying to extract value from them?
Why would one of these larger instances sell out when their userbase can sustain them and selling out is antithetical to the reason they started the instance in the first place?
I and many people like me would be fine in our own instances. We’d just defederate. If, say, lemmy.world sold out those guys would just have to switch instances. It’s a pain, yes, but it’s possible.
Yes perhaps it’s a bit optimistic to think Ruud or sunaurus wouldn’t sell out for, say, a billion dollars. But I think that it’d also be unrealistic to think Meta would actually offer a substantial amount of money measured even in the millions of dollars for any single Lemmy instance.
I don’t think #2 is a strong argument. Reddit, when started, had very different ideals from what it does now. The founders did too, or at least the dead guy did, idk if spez was always what he is now.
If I started a Lemmy or Mastodon instance and it got REAL big, and after 5, maybe 10 years of maintaining it, it’s sustainable, but probably not really making me money and I’m tired of running it… And Meta comes around and says “Hey we’ll buy it for 10 million dollars so we can federate it with our own activitypub based social media”, I’d probably say yes. Wouldn’t you? And while everyone COULD switch, not everyone will. Not everyone switched from reddit either.
So I’d say it’s theoretically possible to corporatize vast parts of the fediverse, but of course there will always be room for people to start new instanced that don’t federate with the corporate ones.
By providing better services and features. Corporations are capable of providing good pro user services when they’re forced to through competition, but what they’ll do is do that until they build a big enough user base then splinter off and start pulling the same shit again. It’s the whole thing behind embrace-extend-extinguish.
Money. Lots of money. If money doesn’t work they’ll try to compete on point 1.
Agree. Most people will be too lazy and unprincipled to care, but I’m fine with a smaller higher quality community and Lemmy makes that possible. If corporations get a foothold on the platform it’ll still be impossible for them to get a 100% monopoly like they can on their own proprietary centralized platforms.
Think about email. A lot of people use Gmail, Hotmail, or other big email providers. However, Oxford University can run its own email server for its own university community. The EFF can run their own email server for their own purposes. Google or Microsoft doesn’t get to dictate to Oxford or the EFF how they run their email server; and they can’t stand in the way of Oxford and the EFF sending email to one another.
It is not that simple to run your own email server anymore. Big providers like Google will treat emails from your server as spam and you will have a difficult time having the mail properly delivered. So big tech has effectively squeezed out federated email.
To be fair, the example OP used was that two independent email servers could still send mail to eachother even if they can’t send mail to gmail. I do feel like social networking has a little bit of an advantage over email there, because email, to be useful, needs to be able to talk to almost anyone you might need to send an email to, those specific users. If a few big instances defederate small instances in that scenario, you basically have to use the big instances because you will most likely need to talk to specific users who are on those big instances at some point. However, in a social network, you want to be able to talk to enough people to have discussions and content, but it doesn’t matter as much if you can talk to any specific user or specific account, so it’s much more viable to have a smaller network of independent instances that still functions if cut off from the big ones, as long as they can collectively retain enough users to be interesting.
The big players do definitely try to shut down independent email. We don’t have to let them succeed though, and the way to fight back is to host your own.
Lemmy allows using any smtp server to send emails. Can use Googles servers, fastmails servers etc.
It’s different from running your own email server. If you run your own, then Google and the others are definently not going to trust it. There are lots of blog posts about the pain of running your own email server.
You’re talking about something completely unrelated to security then. If you want to run services out of your home then you need to buy a business level connection. Or find a VPS service.
None of this will cause you problems with the big names in email as long as you follow the spam procedures.
I was actually agreeing with you, in that running a private mail server is not a difficult endeavor as long as you take those things into account. Most VPS and CSP will block SMTP by default (just recently went through this with AWS, had to specifically request the service) since most everyone doesn’t have a clue how to secure mail relays and stay off blacklists.
Google, Live, AOL, Yahoo etc might hassle you for DKIM or SPF, but in my experience the ISP is the first hurdle.
I have self hosted my email for five years. I’m a hobbyist and it is no problem for me.
Occassionally (very rarely) an email to a new address I’ve never sent before will end up erroneously in a spam folder. This never happens when I send to a business. Instead of everyone throwing up their hands and saying email is way too hard now, how about we hold the big providers accountable for their obvious bullying?
Why do big companies always mark you as spam, and why is it always Hotmail?
My experience is that I have to remove myself from spamhouse once every couple of months, because Hotmail decided that my 5 emails to different accounts was spam. TBF, it’s better than silently failing which is annoying as hell.
The problem with email is the same is always been: antiquated software.
The email protocol was never designed for an internet with bad actors and bots. It’s from the early hopeful days. We absolutely need a better email system - however, it’s simple use, the fact anyone can run one, it’s simplicity, is what made it so useful.
The difference with Lemmy(et. al.) Is that the protocol is designed in the modern age, and isn’t required to also keep up with bad actors for legacy reasons. If Meta decide to join and fill it full of bad actors, Lemmy has a choice email never had. Lemmy can choose to add verification, peer-conversation, trust keys.
It however still has the same basic problem: to be useful for everyone, it has to work with everyone. The discussions and decisions about how that happen are not just technological, but also moral and ideal-based.
Meta, then, in this context, is the first spam email server. How Lemmy/the community/etc respond will be the challenge.
There’s nothing wrong with email. It is essential for all business transacted online. It’s still, by far, the most useful federated software. All that the “bad actors” can do is send messages that the receiver didn’t want, and that’s trivial to stop.
Because we can’t. Who are you going to complain to about it?
Don’t get me wrong, would love to give them as much pain as possible over this. But I don’t see how we can do anything. If I start my own email server, I’m probably going to miss important emails and end up in lots of troubleshooting things. I’m wish it wasnt so. The ideas of the original internet was amazing but capitalism can’t be reasoned with.
some of them blacklist large blocks of ip addresses. Lawsuits can go a long way to forcing them to justify and/or stop this. EFF is working on this, so I give them money. The other thing I can do personally is write to legislators and make sure they are aware of the issue. It’s not yerribly satisfying, but I hope it helps.
In the meantime, I will not be deterred from self hosting. F*@k google.
If anything anyone could also just pick a mail routing server, pay like $50 a year and have as many emails for as many domains as they want. I got one, I have like 8 domains pointed to it for emails. All I had to do was fill in the blanks for the DNS page for the domain (mx, and the spf+dkim) and all emails I send go to inbox like butter. Unlimited email accounts, takes 15 seconds to make, no phone no name no nothing just email+pass and it exists now.
gmail was nice for a bit, but shit man I don’t want to give my life story and phone number every time I want to make an email address.
That doesn’t really follow. Google doesn’t need to be able to create a monopoly over email to benefit from running Gmail, for example; consumer Gmail is basically a loss-leader for Google Workspaces, the money-making arm of Google Apps.
consumer Gmail is basically a loss-leader for Google Workspaces, the money-making arm of Google Apps.
Don’t quote me on this, because I might be wrong, but I believe consumer Gmail is also used to build their personalized ad model for you, so they can show you ads you’re more likely to click on?
These ads are shown to you based on your online activity while you’re signed into Google. We will not scan or read your Gmail messages to show you ads.
They could buyout instances if they wanted, but people could just moved to another instance and other instances can defederate from the corporate instance.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community space dedicated to being helpful and answering each others’ questions on various topics.
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All posts titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That’s it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it’s in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content. Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
Partnered Communities
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
Community Moderation
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
Matrix Chat Room
To find & join our chat room, log into fluffychat.im(or any other matrix client) and put #nostupidquestions:matrix.org on the search bar.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
“Free” is a simplification. Bad actors can hurt lemmy - however it is also easier for the individual to fight back. If an instance acts unfairly, an individual can choose to ignore that instance and not lose all of Lemmy - they would still have access to all other instances.
Follow up question - if I created my account on an instance, and that instance is a bad actor and disappears (not just defederated, but shuts down), wouldn’t I lose my account and all the content associated with it? Posts, replies, saved stuff, etc? That is my understanding based on another thread.
Assuming so, doesn’t that incentivise people to create their accounts on a large instance like lemmy.world? Let’s be real that 99.99% of people are not going to host their own instance to create their account.
Have multiple accounts across different instances. If you pick a few big ones and a few small ones the likelihood that you get stuck without access to anything one day is infinitesimal.
I have a few accounts right now just because sometimes they go down. At first the thought of having franked accounts bothered me, but without the karma system, why should I care about my individual accounts?
Your history would still be out there in the fediverse, but you’d no longer have access to your account to interact with it.
The “Barbie” movie is the only allowed corporate interest on Lemmy, only in theaters July 21st.
Your creepy AI picture of her freaks me out
… OK, I admit, I may have went a little too far with the photo filters this time.
Hello Margot Robbie
Hi!
I’ve seen your account all over the place, love it. You could even be the real one and we’d never have any way of knowing.
Does the meme account continue after barbie is done?
I will never stop until I win my Oscar this year for “Barbie”.
I would have won it easily in 2018 if they named the movie “It’s Hardin’ Time” like I asked them to. “But ooohh, Margot, that name will never catch on, and what do you mean you want your character to ‘Tonya Hardin’ all over Nancy Kerrigan’?”
True genius is never appreciated until it’s too late.
I finally saw a trailer for that movie and it hella reminded me of the Lego Movie. It even has the same actor playing a similar bad guy! If he is named something like “President Business” I will shit my pants laughing.
You’re not the real Margot Robbie… Are you? 😳
Of course I am real, I am as real as the multiple “Barbie” tickets you will buy for your friends and family on opening day July 21st.
But my friends and family aren’t real
it’s similar to what’s happening with mastodon right now. there’s something going on with meta (the zuck) getting involved with mastodon.social, the biggest mastodon instance. because of that reason, a lot of people including myself have switched instances or to a different service entirely. it’s an overwhelming ‘no’ for corporations getting involved with federated social media.
Do you have a source for Meta working with mastodon.social?
How about you provide me with a SOURCE!
Well here you are: https://mastodon.social/@alexeheath/110596207691212890
Eugen respondend though: https://mastodon.social/@Gargron/110599738227401392
And there were other screenshots of Eugen saying he was meeting with Meta Maybe no secret deals- But an NDA meeting.
Do you have a source for Meta being involved with mastodon.social? That’s highly concerning because the same people that run mastodon.social also run lemmy.world.
Then who runs mastodon.world?
Ah, I tried deleting my comment pretty quickly after making it when I did some research and realized I was wrong. The deleted comment must not have updated properly with other Lemmy instances? Lemmy.world is not run by the same people as mastodon.social - you’re right that it’s run by the same people as mastodon.world. I was mistaken.
No worries. I was a bit confused too.
All I’ve heard is that their new Threads app will be connected to the fediverse. Not sure what other development there is.
honestly i don’t have a specific source, it’s more something i found out through hearsay on mastodon.social. personally i’m now part of a calckey instance that’s specifically stated they won’t associate with meta. searching around i found this but nothing concrete.
This is especially relevant right now. Meta (Facebook’s parent company) is just now launching a (heavily) modified Mastodon instance. There is a push to immediately defederate them to keep them out (Source)
There’s a good discussion about it here. But in short, if you allow a single dominant player to exist, they can effectively take over the entire ecosystem
Yes it can happen. But also the Fediverse gives us lots of room/freedom to just move to another instace, create your own, etc. Also as soon as it would become aparent that an instance as been captured, I think most Fediverse users would move away from it. We are not a good target IMO for these greedy mfers.
Easy enough to switch instances if/when it happens
The biggest problem Lemmy has is funding, and that’s going to be a continual problem.
But it’s like this. Corporations can enter the space and offer their content/servers/communities for free, and people can use those servers. If people want to be on corpo servers, they can choose it, if they don’t they won’t be on one.
If corporations start charging for server, then the other Lemmy servers just don’t pay and restrict access to those servers, people will choose if they want to pay for Lemmy (and go to Lemmy servers who pay, or the corpo servers) or more likely accept it and stop.
But like I said the problem is funding, there needs to be continual funding to run the servers they have, but I believe the goal will be to keep the servers from being bloated pieces of shit like Reddit, and hopefully that means they will be cheaper and maybe can be done through donations.
As for “Can’t they buy out.” Let’s say I’m bad guy business, and I’ll simply offer to hire you or buy your business, you never actually have to work for me, or sell me your business. The only reason something like Activision will sell their business is because Activision because Activision wants to, or really a majority of share holders want to.
Lemmy.world is owned by something or someone. If they don’t want to sell to a corporation they can just choose not to. The problem is Reddit is owned by shareholders, and enough shareholders that they can be taken over.
If someone has 51 percent of reddit (Conde Nast) and someone offers A LOT of money for Reddit, they can still say no… though Conde Nast as a corporation itself has share holders themselves so if they did something stupid (Ignoring an offer for like 2-10x the valuation) those share holders are going to question it… That doesn’t mean Conde Nast HAS to even take a 10x valuation (if they think the site is worth 20x, they obviously wouldn’t) but that’s why Reddit is able to be bought since they have to answer to the share holders and Lemmy theoretically could stay non corporate.
The thing is: the average person with admin skills can probably house 100+ users at almost no cost, or comfortably out of pocket
maybe a few donations soo thats what decentralisation hopes to achive
One of the major instances (lemmy.ml? Maybe lemmy.world? I can’t find the post right now) recently posted that they completed a massive spec upgrade for their instance. It was remarkably reasonable, and could very easily be covered by donations. Something like 4 vCPUs and 32GB RAM. Or, failing that, (and I know a lot of people will balk at this), a single non-datamined ad at the top of the page.
Technically it’s not since any corporate entity could set up an instance and join the Fediverse, there’s nothing to stop them. However they could get blacklisted by other instances for whatever reason. For example if Meta were to set up a giant server and plop it on the fediverse, all the admins could collectively say screw those guys and defederate them across the whole thing.
So in that sense there’s no one corporation that could take control. The community is and always will be collectively in control. The philosophy of the Fediverse is FOSS so if a corporate entity tried to monetize an instance, other admins would be pretty quick to block it.
OK, but what if Meta’s instance, due to their vast marketing power, becomes an order of magnitude larger than the rest of the fediverse (I don’t think that’s an unreasonable fear); some instances start federating with it justifying that it brings you both worlds, it becomes an increasingly hard-sell to join those instances not federating with it and they became very niche or die out. Consider how Android started out as a nice neutral FOSS project and, while still technically FOSS, once Google became dominant it became Google spyware.
Many open source projects have died that way, embrace, extend, extinguish. True it’s hard to say for sure that Lemmy and the Fediverse will never fall victim to that. However there’s lots of open source projects that have endured without corporate corruption.
To be fair, AOSP is open-source and free of Google’s services, but said services deliver ecosystem integration - and now even core functionality, as they’re deprecating the stock dialer app.
You say “to be fair” but with full respect I don’t think there’s a fairer way to put it than how I described it as “technically FOSS”. The source is free but does it work to provide freedom to users?
No. Lemmy (and any other FediVerse service) can be targeted for take over from any corporation. But there’s a few things that prevents from thinks like… Idk, Facebook buying Instagram or Musk buying Twitter:
Tl;Dr: we are not free of corporate interest, but we have tools to prevent a corporate dominance.
Well I think we’re just about to see, since Meta are about to try something funny.
I fear that simply having all instances agreeing to not federate with Meta won’t be enough, we need something stronger to shut them out, something analogous to copyleft that could enforce a level of openness - but I don’t think we have that. I really hope I’m wrong, I really hope Meta fail with all of their endeavours, but it is a worry.
If you have access to the source code (which you do), the only effective corporate attack against networked software is to convince all your friends not to use the software and to use their proprietary software instead.
deleted by creator
So far I think this is the most succinct and correct answer.
In another thread I posted the hypothetical example of a company standing up an instance with a really robust infrastructure (lots of storage, fast and redundant servers, etc). They could use their more significant money and resources to offer things other instances can’t. For example they could attract big names to do AMAs, or they could create communities with huge amounts of useful content that lots of people feel is invaluable. People would be encouraged to make lots of communities there and lots might make it their home instance.
Then, once it’s really entrenched, the company could decide to start charging a subscription for access, or could start serving up ads. It could be painful to walk away from it in a similar way people have felt pain moving away from Reddit. The difference is that, regardless of how big it is, it’s still just one instance among many. You wouldn’t have to walk away from Lemmy, just that instance.
Sure they can. But…
Everybody has a price… Sell out is just a matter to get to that price
Yes perhaps it’s a bit optimistic to think Ruud or sunaurus wouldn’t sell out for, say, a billion dollars. But I think that it’d also be unrealistic to think Meta would actually offer a substantial amount of money measured even in the millions of dollars for any single Lemmy instance.
I don’t think #2 is a strong argument. Reddit, when started, had very different ideals from what it does now. The founders did too, or at least the dead guy did, idk if spez was always what he is now.
If I started a Lemmy or Mastodon instance and it got REAL big, and after 5, maybe 10 years of maintaining it, it’s sustainable, but probably not really making me money and I’m tired of running it… And Meta comes around and says “Hey we’ll buy it for 10 million dollars so we can federate it with our own activitypub based social media”, I’d probably say yes. Wouldn’t you? And while everyone COULD switch, not everyone will. Not everyone switched from reddit either.
So I’d say it’s theoretically possible to corporatize vast parts of the fediverse, but of course there will always be room for people to start new instanced that don’t federate with the corporate ones.
Think about email. A lot of people use Gmail, Hotmail, or other big email providers. However, Oxford University can run its own email server for its own university community. The EFF can run their own email server for their own purposes. Google or Microsoft doesn’t get to dictate to Oxford or the EFF how they run their email server; and they can’t stand in the way of Oxford and the EFF sending email to one another.
It is not that simple to run your own email server anymore. Big providers like Google will treat emails from your server as spam and you will have a difficult time having the mail properly delivered. So big tech has effectively squeezed out federated email.
To be fair, the example OP used was that two independent email servers could still send mail to eachother even if they can’t send mail to gmail. I do feel like social networking has a little bit of an advantage over email there, because email, to be useful, needs to be able to talk to almost anyone you might need to send an email to, those specific users. If a few big instances defederate small instances in that scenario, you basically have to use the big instances because you will most likely need to talk to specific users who are on those big instances at some point. However, in a social network, you want to be able to talk to enough people to have discussions and content, but it doesn’t matter as much if you can talk to any specific user or specific account, so it’s much more viable to have a smaller network of independent instances that still functions if cut off from the big ones, as long as they can collectively retain enough users to be interesting.
Set up DKIM and they’ll accept your email. That’s just anti-spam / anti-phishing; it’s not an attempt to shut down independent email.
The big players do definitely try to shut down independent email. We don’t have to let them succeed though, and the way to fight back is to host your own.
Edit: *one way to fight back.
Hmm. If what you were saying was true, then a lot of new Lemmy instance operators would be having problems with email verification.
Lemmy allows using any smtp server to send emails. Can use Googles servers, fastmails servers etc.
It’s different from running your own email server. If you run your own, then Google and the others are definently not going to trust it. There are lots of blog posts about the pain of running your own email server.
I’ve had hosted email from a service provider for years and never had a problem. I’m not talking anyone big here.
There are literally no problems running your own server if you comply with anti spam measures.
Most germans are on gmx.net, and they block residential ips. So it’s impossible to send them messages. So i had to abandon my efforts.
How does that work, complying with anti spam measures?
This is truly not meant to be snarky: It sounds like you don’t know how email works.
And this is what people are afraid of with meta joining Mastadon.
That’s absolutely not true. I run my own email server with multiple domains and multiple accounts and it’s no where close to a difficult IT task.
If anything it’s the ISPs that will hassle you for outbound SMTP. There are ways around that but generally blocked by default
You’re talking about something completely unrelated to security then. If you want to run services out of your home then you need to buy a business level connection. Or find a VPS service.
None of this will cause you problems with the big names in email as long as you follow the spam procedures.
I’m yet to see a vps service that is not outright banned on gmail.
I run on AWS Lightsail, have been since 2018 and all is working fine.
Yeeaaah, I should have worded it as “cheap vps service”.
I was actually agreeing with you, in that running a private mail server is not a difficult endeavor as long as you take those things into account. Most VPS and CSP will block SMTP by default (just recently went through this with AWS, had to specifically request the service) since most everyone doesn’t have a clue how to secure mail relays and stay off blacklists.
Google, Live, AOL, Yahoo etc might hassle you for DKIM or SPF, but in my experience the ISP is the first hurdle.
Ah i see. Yeah i went through that process with AWS too. It sucks but it’s not a horrible process.
FUD
I have self hosted my email for five years. I’m a hobbyist and it is no problem for me.
Occassionally (very rarely) an email to a new address I’ve never sent before will end up erroneously in a spam folder. This never happens when I send to a business. Instead of everyone throwing up their hands and saying email is way too hard now, how about we hold the big providers accountable for their obvious bullying?
Why do big companies always mark you as spam, and why is it always Hotmail?
My experience is that I have to remove myself from spamhouse once every couple of months, because Hotmail decided that my 5 emails to different accounts was spam. TBF, it’s better than silently failing which is annoying as hell.
The problem with email is the same is always been: antiquated software.
The email protocol was never designed for an internet with bad actors and bots. It’s from the early hopeful days. We absolutely need a better email system - however, it’s simple use, the fact anyone can run one, it’s simplicity, is what made it so useful.
The difference with Lemmy(et. al.) Is that the protocol is designed in the modern age, and isn’t required to also keep up with bad actors for legacy reasons. If Meta decide to join and fill it full of bad actors, Lemmy has a choice email never had. Lemmy can choose to add verification, peer-conversation, trust keys.
It however still has the same basic problem: to be useful for everyone, it has to work with everyone. The discussions and decisions about how that happen are not just technological, but also moral and ideal-based.
Meta, then, in this context, is the first spam email server. How Lemmy/the community/etc respond will be the challenge.
There’s nothing wrong with email. It is essential for all business transacted online. It’s still, by far, the most useful federated software. All that the “bad actors” can do is send messages that the receiver didn’t want, and that’s trivial to stop.
Because we can’t. Who are you going to complain to about it?
Don’t get me wrong, would love to give them as much pain as possible over this. But I don’t see how we can do anything. If I start my own email server, I’m probably going to miss important emails and end up in lots of troubleshooting things. I’m wish it wasnt so. The ideas of the original internet was amazing but capitalism can’t be reasoned with.
It consumes all until there is nothing left.
some of them blacklist large blocks of ip addresses. Lawsuits can go a long way to forcing them to justify and/or stop this. EFF is working on this, so I give them money. The other thing I can do personally is write to legislators and make sure they are aware of the issue. It’s not yerribly satisfying, but I hope it helps.
In the meantime, I will not be deterred from self hosting. F*@k google.
If anything anyone could also just pick a mail routing server, pay like $50 a year and have as many emails for as many domains as they want. I got one, I have like 8 domains pointed to it for emails. All I had to do was fill in the blanks for the DNS page for the domain (mx, and the spf+dkim) and all emails I send go to inbox like butter. Unlimited email accounts, takes 15 seconds to make, no phone no name no nothing just email+pass and it exists now.
gmail was nice for a bit, but shit man I don’t want to give my life story and phone number every time I want to make an email address.
Keep up the good fight. I’m grateful you are trying. And fuck Google.
Great example. Fedverse sounds like a space that corporations would have no interest in as there is no opportunity to create a monopoly.
That doesn’t really follow. Google doesn’t need to be able to create a monopoly over email to benefit from running Gmail, for example; consumer Gmail is basically a loss-leader for Google Workspaces, the money-making arm of Google Apps.
Don’t quote me on this, because I might be wrong, but I believe consumer Gmail is also used to build their personalized ad model for you, so they can show you ads you’re more likely to click on?
I believe they used to target ads based on email content, but they currently state that they don’t.
And harvesting data of course.
Could you describe in detail what you’re saying here?
Well they hoard data by hosting your emails? They surely feed all that stuff into their AI:s.
The only viable way to control the Fediverse is an embrace, extend, and extinguish approach.
Anything less and you become a Fediverse backwater instead of a monopoly.
This sounds exactly like how they would think! Especially the reach critical mass and defederate from everyone else.
they did: see xmpp
What a great read. Thanks for linking that article - I had no idea about most of that stuff.
This is what many expect is the goal of Meta’s forthcoming Thread.
deleted by creator
They could buyout instances if they wanted, but people could just moved to another instance and other instances can defederate from the corporate instance.
Yeah, nothing better than taking a million euros and then just making a new instance with a slightly different name.