Why would they need threads for that? A whole bunch of companies are already doing that without running actual social media services.
They can analyse your likes and you wouldn't even know it. All they need to do is follow the same servers you do here on Lemmy. On Mastodon they can set up a basic puppet domain, follow every user they can find, and then your Mastodon server will deliver your posts, likes, and re-tweet for them, no scraping or interaction necessary.
If you're trying not to get analysed, the Fediverse is not for you. It's simply not designed for privacy.
Seems to me like they just want to greenwash (open wash?) their company by making it work with others. Saves a hell of a lot of trouble with legislators when it comes to stuff like the Digital Markets Act.
I'm sure they're selling ads to their users, but I think that's about it. There's no money to be made analysing random internet accounts if you can't show them ads when you're big enough for EU regulators to care.
Afaik on lemmy only your host instance knows what you upvote/downvote, instances just sync the number of upvotes, not the users who voted. So they cannot analyze that, even if they spin up a their own lemmy instance l was wrong, see reply
Votes federate, but only for communities followed. I won't see your votes in a community that I don't follow, but I can see when you upvoted or downvoted what post in the community.
A scraper could simply follow every community on a Lemmy server and, barring Lemmy performance issues, will receive all comments and votes.
Just a quick and dirty SQL query of which votes of yours are in my server's database:
select comment_like.score as score,comment_like.published as when, person.actor_id as who, comment.ap_id as what from comment_like join person on person.id = comment_like.person_id join comment on comment.id = comment_like.comment_id where person.actor_id = 'https://lemmy.ml/u/GolfNovemberUniform' order by comment_like.published desc;
The same info is also available for posts, of course, I just didn't want to bother making the query any longer.
Server admins/mods on Lemmy also have a button to see who upvoted and downvoted each post. This is just the inverse of that.
Can someone explain why so many comments saying this is bad and want their instances to block threads? Seems like it would be a good thing to make the fediverse bigger and more accessible.
Meta is so well known for having good moderating. (/s)
Meta is so well known for promoting posts that are active hate-speech. (For example, CW in Link: suggested "Threads" posts on Instagram have shown transphobic posts to me Which kind of goes back to point 1, terrible moderation. Btw, my partner is involved with Queer Activism on facebook and so it's not like I am being targeted for hateful ads. This is just what they decided to promote, probably because it got a lot of comments and shares. Oh, why do we want Threads users who are actively sharing this rhetoric? Seems antithetical to the entire concept that the fediverse was founded on.
What happens to the rest of the fediverse when it's overrun by millions of Threads users, hundreds of thousands of them promoting this sort of content? All defederated instances will now have to pick and choose - something we already do, but I would say we only need to look at Lemmy.World to see why this is a bad thing, as imagine Threads communities become the regularly used ones, so now any instances that defederate don't have access to the most active community. In turn, this either kills the defederated communities by keeping these communities small, or actively encourages those new to the fediverse to just join Threads since it has "the most active" communities.
Now that there are millions of threads users, what happens to smaller instances that are now being overrun by traffic that their server couldn't handle, or malicious users on Threads - with Lemmy's moderation tools this can be a cumbersome and difficult process since, from my understanding, this becomes a case-by-case situation for the Instance Moderator, all while the Threads Moderating Team will likely do nothing and ignore the inflammatory users. From my understanding, you can have 1 Threads account per Instagram Profile, and users can have 5 Instagram Profiles. Obviously, this is also a Lemmy issue, but with Instance Admins having control over their users, Threads as an Instance Admin historically hasn't seemed to be great.
The Fediverse is some ~1.5m users. Threads is already 100m. As mentioned about server load, there's also just the entire idea of it being so big that it naturally becomes a vital resource. E1) Extend. As it becomes widely used, Meta starts taking an interest in the future of ActivityPub. E2) Embrace. And finally, now that it is established and smaller instances are either defederated or have some form of, effectively a shadowban, all that is realistically left is Threads content. E3) Extinguish.
Is the fediverse being more accessible a good thing? Absolutely, not many are arguing that. The idea is that Threads gets so big that ActivityPub either can’t exist without Threads, or Threads leeches the userbase from the rest of the Fediverse. Someone you like is on Threads but not the rest of the Fedi? Well, why have a Lemmy.ML account when you can just have your Threads account?
Before you know it, we're back to only having one website again for all of our social media needs.
In short, Facebook are incentivised to increase conflict and hate, it improves user engagement. They have also leveraged their large user base to boost numbers in threads significantly. Threads is already a cess pip of bigotry and hate.
Federating with them would be like connecting your house's drinking water pipe with the sewage pipe of an industrial pig farm. It would pollute our community to the point of destruction.
They might try and control this initially. Unfortunately, it would almost certainly be part of an embrace, extend, extinguish attempt. ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish ). They play nice till they have control of enough communities, then they stop the controls, to increase profits.
Threads will now let people like and see replies to their Threads posts that appear on other federated social media platforms, the company announced on Tuesday.
Previously, if you made a post on Threads that was syndicated to another platform like Mastodon, you wouldn’t be able to see responses to that post while still inside Threads.
That meant you’d have to bounce back and forth between the platforms to stay up-to-date on replies.
Thanks to this upgrade, you’ll probably do less of that, but in a screenshot, Meta notes that you can’t reply to replies “yet,” so it sounds like that feature will arrive in the future.
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg also revealed that Threads’ fediverse integration will be available starting today in more than 100 countries, a significant expansion from its initial availability in the US, Canada, and Japan.
Meta has been vocal about its plans to integrate with the decentralized social networking protocol ActivityPub since launching Threads nearly a year ago, with first testing starting in December.
The original article contains 169 words, the summary contains 169 words. Saved 0%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
