The same argument could be used for copyright itself, and why we have non-commercial licenses for things. Just because you are giving something away as free (as in beer), doesn't mean that some for-profit should be able to just use it to drive up their user base and make the corp more money. I think content creators, or at the very least in the fediverse - server owners, should be able to limit what corporations can suck up to further corporate profits at the expense of the fediverse.

If you want to run a server and donate your resources to make a for-profit corp money, that is your right, but to tell everyone that they should have no control of their content is unacceptable to me.

[–] dsemy@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You can't stop them from sucking up your data as long as your posts are public.

Even if it was made illegal, how would you even know they're doing it? It's not like these companies are afraid of breaking the law, they'll just get a small fine if they get caught anyway.

Mainstream social media sites and apps collect an extreme amount of data for the companies running them. For this reason, you are already far better off using alternative like Lemmy or Mastodon. But don't be delusional, you can't expect privacy when you make public posts.

I don't disagree that it would be a good thing if you could limit what these corps can suck up, it just doesn't really seem possible.

[–] TimLovesTech@badatbeing.social 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I don't think the argument is even about privacy, but giving away someone else's (or in this case potentially a whole network of people's content), and admins resources in order to drive some corporate profits they aren't even getting a share of. If someone needs to chat with someone on Bluesky that bad then they should just make an account, not undermine a whole network so they can be lazy.

[–] dsemy@lemm.ee 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Following that logic, if someone on Lemmy needs to chat with someone on Mastodon that bad they should just make an account.

Calling someone lazy for building and running a service which bridges between different protocols is both dumb and rude.

[–] TimLovesTech@badatbeing.social 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Mastodon is part of the fediverse though, and is open and a nonprofit. Bluesky is neither of those things, and that is why it's different.

And giving the resources from a free and open network to a for-profit corporation is both dumb and rude IMHO.

[–] dsemy@lemm.ee 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Do some research before you make incorrect claims.

AT (the protocol used by Bluesky) is an open protocol with an open reference implementation.

AT supports federation (and with this bridge could be made part of the fediverse).

Bluesky itself is also open, and while the company is for-profit that doesn't change anything for people running their own Bluesky servers.

I'll say it again - you're not giving them anything they aren't already able to (legally) acquire.