this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
59587 readers
2940 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Because Facebook hasn't done anything yet.
Blocking Facebook as a user is not good enough. Any server that connects to them legitimizes them and is not acceptable behavior.
It absolute is not a conspiracy, and most people unwilling to participate in any server that interacts with Facebook in any way are doing so exactly because they understand the technology and Facebook's history. Literally everything Facebook has ever touched turned to dogshit. "I won't participate in a platform that doesn't completely block Facebook" is not the naive, uninformed position. (That's using Facebook and their other platforms.) It's the people who recognize how pure fucking evil Facebook is.
And they cannot circumvent to ActivityPub protocol to display ads to users who don't want so see them. Claiming otherwise is conspiracy theories.
Yes, it is.
That's not for you to decide.
It absolutely is.
First: That's untrue.
Second: Such an opinion is based on conspiracy theories and therefore not valid.
No, they and you don't.
Yes, it is and you don't even realize that you are participatin in a platform that doesn’t completely block ~~Facebook~~ Threads right now. That's proof enough that you don't understand the technology.
Then allowing ad-free access to accounts hosted there should be your agenda. That's how they don't get money, not by pushing people to sign up for their platform, just because they want to follow their favorite movie franchise or sports team.
https://sh.itjust.works/instances lists threads.net under the blocked instances list, not everyone is using lemmy.world. Inform yourself before accusing others of making uninformed statements.
But you're in an lemmy.word-hosted community right now, interacting with me who has a LW account, so you're participating on a platform that's federating with Threads. That's like claiming not to participate with anything Google while mailing these claims to GMail addresses. You're participating. You just don't know how ActivityPub works and that's why you think that being on any Fediverse server that didn't explicitly block Threads would result in sposored posts from Threads magically showing up. You're a conspiracy theorist.
You very obviously do not understand how the blocklist works so here's a very practical example:
ani.social is blocked by lemmy.ml.
Here is a post on lemmy.world containing comments by users from ani.social: https://lemmy.world/post/18538115
Here is that same post on lemmy.ml, which has blocked ani.social: https://lemmy.ml/post/19043133
Note the absence of any comment made by a user on ani.social. As far as users on lemmy.ml are concerned ani.social does not exist (as of 10 months ago, some existing content before then can still be viewed). I think you don't know how ActivityPub works and calling me a conspiracy theorist won't change that.
What great arguments you have. Really gonna convince people with that.
Yes, I have, you just chose not to quote any of them. Threads cannot push ads to Mastodon users who don't want to see them. Mastoton users can subscribe to brand accounts who then may make promotional posts but again: Threads cannot push any of those to users as ads. That's simply not how ActivityPub works. I explained this countless times already. Certain people just aren't interested in facts and choose to quote selectively as if those arguments were never made. That's dishonest.