• Corgana@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    How would blocking yourself from the ability to follow Threads accounts stop them from… anything? It’s not two-way if one of the two parties doesn’t want it to be, and Meta can’t be trusted.

    • millie@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      It’s two-way. It prevents interactivity between the instances, meaning that Mastodon doesn’t get flooded with Threads users and Threads doesn’t get access to Mastodon content.

      Preventing both of those things is a win for the fediverse, because it preserves its identity and purpose rather than just being 10% of a network controlled mostly by Meta.

      Allowing both of these things to happen is a win for Meta, because their users overwhelm the fediverse and they get free content until it no longer exists.

      We don’t lose anything by staying away from Meta, unless you like really love Facebook and want that to be what the fediverse is reduced to. Unchecked growth isn’t a win, it’s cancer.

      • WamGams@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        I am thinking along the same lines as you. The fediverse needs to remain free of commercial interests and influences.

        We all came here because we were looking for community driven social media, while metavitself has largely killed the modern world’s sense of community.