this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2023
1347 points (94.4% liked)
Fediverse
28301 readers
749 users here now
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).
If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!
Rules
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.
Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration), Search Lemmy
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
I seriously don't understand this mindset! If meta manages to make a better product it will definitely have more users, it's just how everything works!
Users will have the option to pick between convince of meta or freedom of smaller instances. Who are we to decide for everyone?
Meta and other big for profit players in social media have a bad history. Privacy, ads, profits at all cost. The people concerned about this early on are basing it off the previous behaviors of these companies.
I feel like it's a good and early immune response.
If it's not technically possible for them to show me ads, see my ip, private messages etc how is this harmful?
I'm thinking in terms of the future.They'll have profit incentives to find ways acquire whatever data they can profit from. While they may not be able to do certain things now, companies like this chip away bit by bit in the long term.
With their incentives, resources, and prior behavior, I'm not certain what they can add would be worth whatever the positive result of their profit making activity.
Edits: spelling.