I see it as a win if all instances defederate with Threads but several “read-only” instances federates with it. At least it can be viewed in privacy friendly way.

  • DevCat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m pretty sure that would not be in Meta’s best interest, from their point of view. After all, Meta is all about harvesting your personal data. I believe whether to federate or not will come down to how egregious the federation terms are that Meta will propose because you know they will want to access user data in some fashion for their own profit. If they want the same kind of data from the Fediverse as they get from their native app, the answer will be a resounding “no”. If they ask for even 20% of that data, the answer will remain the same.

    • whenigrowup356@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      If things played out in just the right way, this could push them away from the Fediverse entirely, I’d think. Seems it would be hard to monetize any traffic coming from the Fediverse end of things, which would make the whole thing more of a headache than it’s worth for them.

      An instance that was explicitly set up as a read-only backdoor to Threads probably wouldn’t stay federated long, but is a cool idea at least.

    • linearchaos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t know, they could be using the federverse as content provision. They get better data on all their users based on where they go and what they see on the federiverse.