I’m conflicted. I have no sympathy for Meta, but I think it would be a mistake to defed from all corporate-run servers axiomatically. Involvement from deep-pocket industries has its issues, but it also builds legitimacy and awareness.
You wouldn’t want your email provider to block all communication with Gmail, just because it’s Google-hosted, would you?
Ultimately, the strength of the decentralized model is to allow those who don’t want to see normie Meta content to move to a platform like Scicomm. But I worry for the drama and fallout when large instances make decisions that affect a huge number of users.
You wouldn’t want your email provider to block all communication with Gmail, just because it’s Google-hosted, would you?
In retrospect, I wish they would have done so when it was still viable. I wish they all would’ve done so and shown Google the door.
I didn’t know it at the time Gmail was introduced. But I know it now, and this is the similar point in time for the fediverse.
The only reason to pursue “corporate legitimacy” is for profit, which. I’d say that folks interested in meta content can simply join meta instances.
I’ve seen a lot of comparison to email services, and I think it’s an apples to oranges comparison. Email is meant to be a electronic communication standard to allow you to communicate with anyone. The fediverse is all about individual community control, not global and universal communication.
