@stux any opinions?

@dansup I want to start an instance just to vote no in this poll 😂 In all seriousness though, I am thinking it would be cool to start a Calckey instance.

@dansup this sounds a lot like "embrace, extend, extinguish" to me

@dansup There are good arguments both ways, but at the very least I would be very wary. We cannot expect a business whose core aim is the monetisation of metadata on their users to act as a good citizen.

I'd hope that the community would work with e.g. the EU to at minimum outlaw Meta from collecting and monetising metadata on users of other instances they peer with.

@dansup … a pox on meta …

@dansup As someone who runs my own small Mastodon instance I would have to fediblock them. Apparently you can sign up to this with Instagram credentials, and since over a billion people have Instagram credentials...that will crash small fedi instances.

@dansup I wouldn't ban any instance altogether unless it's filled with, like, pedos, trolls and neonazis. The Fediverse is open to everyone by default, innocent until proven guilty.

@dansup I don't get why the other instances would need to block this Meta app. I would like to have the option to decide if I follow someone on that app if I want. Now, if Meta pushes advertising on the other instances, then I would prefer to block it.

@dansup Meta is a corporation and their any move will be to make profit from sale of private data and making a walled garden around the service people use which is opposite to entire fediverse model of decentralisation and cooperation. Meta will only here to be a parasite, fediverse need not big company, but a community based around the decentralisation, oppeness, floss.

@dansup I am here as a refuge from Twitter and Facebook. I would prefer they not come here.

@dansup Undecided genuinely. My first thought was yes but at the same time it could be a magnet to pull people out too.

@dansup The Internet is built on interoperability, and I think that should be encouraged. If it's abused, sure, take steps, but preemptively discouraging companies from participating in open protocols seems like a bad move.

@dansup We can expect them to collect data on remote profiles for their ad business and not just from profiles on their own server.

This is not #GDPR-Compliant, because the people on my server did not consent to this during signup, so, I'd definitely defederate them not just for moral but also for legal reasons.

#fediverse #barcelona #activityPub #meta

@dansup
I honestly don't know. I think I'd let my community decide, which will probably lead to a ban, but I myself don't really know.
Because even if it works like with Jabber or XMPP like many in the comments mentioned the people on Instagram, etc would have the argument that "we could talk to them if we didn't ban them, so why should we switch". But why would they switch if we ban insta. I don't know, but I think it could benefit the fediverse and it could really harm it.

@dansup If I *did* run a fediverse instance I *would* ban a Meta instance.

@dansup Fuck yes. I don't want my stuff going to their servers any more than I want to see their stuff.

I block incoming links to my website if they have Facebook tracking IDs ("fbclid" parameters).

@dansup probably yes to protect our users datas, but it depends on what they propose.

@dansup Seems rather snobby to block it out of the gate. As long as it's playing ball properly and there isn't a large toxic element there, I'd give it a chance. :P

@dansup totally. Seems a bit naive to expect a mega-corporation to suddenly stop acting like a mega-corporation.

So… “embrace, extend, extinguish” & “genocide is fine” modding