With the upcoming #meta #Project92 Fediverse service, there has been a, well, robust discussion of how to avoid threats looming. Those advocating mass-preemptive defederation make three cases for it. ➡️ To avoid data mining … However, defederation does virtually zero to avoid any big tech entity scraping all the Fediverse public social graph today - Want proof? See here: is.gd/q8U2pv But what if they merge that Fediverse data with their own internal data from IG isn’t that worse than just scraped data?

With the upcoming #meta #Project92 Fediverse service, this is a plan to fight smarter in how to both protect our users, and how to be better battle plan to protect the Open Social Web.

    • 0x1C3B00DA@kbin.social
      1·
      1 year ago

      I agree with arguments about Meta’s moderation (more accurately, lack of it) and rebuffing the idea that using open protocols means we’re obliged to connect with everybody. Also, Gruber’s assertion of pettiness is ridiculous; Meta is a heinous company who doesn’t deserve any benefit of the doubt.

      But I think ppl on the fediverse need to get real about data privacy. Meta has a ton of data and I’m not sure how much extra value fediverse data would be to it, but if they want fediverse data they can already get it. The fediverse is public and crawling it is way easier than building a compatible AP service and hoping non-meta users connect to your users. They can get all public data on the fediverse with a webcrawl, but building a service means spending time and money and they still would only get data from users willing to connect with their service.
      TLDR: Blocking a Meta AP service does not protect your data from Meta.