Technology

59111 readers

3509 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Another case for defederating from threads.net (Meta’s Twitter replacement that supports ActivtyPub) (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 year ago by LargeHardonCollider@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

15 comments fedilink hide all child comments

There’s been a lot of talk about Meta’s new twitter clone called Threads because it will federate with other ActivityPub apps. I’ve seen several posts about them possibly using the app as a way to embrace, extend, and extinguish ActivityPub.

Another more immediate concern I have is that Meta will now be able to harvest data from users of other ActivityPub social networks like Lemmy and Mastodon. If Alice on Threads follows Bob on Mastodon for example, that means Bob’s mastodon instance will send information about all of Bob’s posts and everyone who interacts with them to Meta so that Alice can see it.

This is a concern specifically with Meta and other big tech companies running ActivityPub-enabled servers, because their primary motive is to harvest user data to use for advertising. The scariest part to me is that users on networks like Mastodon specifically migrated to Mastodon to get away from big tech, and Meta is still able to harvest their data with Threads.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] jecxjo@midwest.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It is theoretically possible to publish in public while protecting information but it requires the added step of maintaining authorization for those you wish to see that data.

You could create a protocol where poster info is encrypted and only the appropriate parties are given the keys to access that information. To the general public it's posted by an anonymous user.

The question to ask is who really cares that much about your posts? Use a VPN and make an alt account and Bob's your Uncle.

[–] orclev@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There's also the question of the value of that metadata. If something like an email address or phone number was tied to your account in a publicly available fashion that would be one thing as those are relatively unique and can be used to tie back to an individual person. But if all you're getting is a username with nothing else attached that's a lot more nebulous. If you care to obfuscate your activity you could easily just create an account with a name you've never used before. That's probably far more effective at preventing your "data" from being harvested by meta than some kind of encryption scheme would be unless you're willing to go all in on E2E encryption which creates a ton of other problems that would need to be solved.

[–] jecxjo@midwest.social 2 points 1 year ago

Exactly. But you can now get burner numbers much easier so obfuscating the meta data outside the service is getting easier. Not perfect but easier.

If you are doing things where you need full on clean room level obfuscation you can never use any type of service outside of your full control. At that point you're talking one time pads and posting messages in the wanted ads of news papers.