But then if other instances don't want those features, isn't the worst that can happen that instances just de-federate from Threads? I know the history of EEE, but I don't see how that can even work here.

[–] null@slrpnk.net 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

But then if other instances don't want those features

In other words, if other instances don't want to have compatibility with the popular instances -- hence the issue.

[–] ampersandrew@kbin.social 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

That's not really an issue though; or at least, I'm not yet convinced it's one. We're here because we don't want to have compatibility with Reddit, and I'm on Mastodon because I don't want to have compatibility with Twitter.

[–] null@slrpnk.net 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

We're here

Are we though? Because it looks like you're on kbin and I'm on slrpnk.

If either one of our instances decides to implement proprietary features that Threads creates (the second E in EEE) and the other one doesn't, that could break the experience of us being "here" together.

[–] ampersandrew@kbin.social 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

And we're free to move to another instance that has the access, or lack thereof, that we want.

[–] null@slrpnk.net 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yup, thus fragmenting the crap out of the fediverse (the last E)

[–] ampersandrew@kbin.social 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I always saw that as a feature, not a bug. The feature that prevents it from being the last E.

[–] null@slrpnk.net 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

If you see massive fragmentation as a feature then I really don't know what to tell you.

I guess enjoy?

[–] ampersandrew@kbin.social 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'm a Linux user. That "fragmentation" is probably a good reason for why that hasn't been extinguished either. So as far as I can tell, yes, I'll enjoy the resilience that that implies without fear of it being extinguished.

[–] null@slrpnk.net 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I really don't think that's a meaningful comparison.

Federation relies on unity -- fragmentation ruins that.

[–] ampersandrew@kbin.social 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Well, you can stick to instances that federate with Threads even if/when they misbehave then, but having the option not to is pretty great, from my perspective.

[–] null@slrpnk.net 1 points 8 months ago

Sure, that's great while it's still just "instances that do federate with threads" and "instances that don't federate with threads".

[–] SamXavia@kbin.run 1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Yes if certain instances don't like Threads they can de-federate from it, and I'm sure a few will, Personally I think it should be down to user choice as the users on Threads aren't to bad it's the company that is.

[–] awwwyissss@lemm.ee 2 points 8 months ago

the users on Threads aren't to bad

Ehhhh...

[–] sour@kbin.social 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

low quality content ._.