I don't think it is an overreaction. There is a reason Meta won't allow Threads accounts to be deleted without also deleting your Instagram account. They are holding people hostage in a sense. It is a deliberate move, and there is no reason they couldn't disassociate a Threads account from an Instagram account and delete it. Hell, no need to even disassociate it at all.
Isn't a major reassurance from Eugen, and others who also signed Meta's NDA, that you can move your account from Threads? How is that truly possible if they don't let you delete the account without also deleting your Instagram account?
This is the type of malignant and anti-open behavior we can expect from Meta. And they are doing it right out of the gate, before they even embrace ActivityPub as they rush to capitalize on Twitter's mess.
I stand by my previous statements: Meta's vision of Threads is to suck up as much growth in our community, then wall it off with tactics like the above, all while embracing open standards.
It isn't like we don't see it happen elsewhere. Google did it with their "proprietarization" of RCS. Google promoted its growth and adoption, then slammed the door shut. That is why Signal and others do not have RCS; Google refuses to allow competitors to have access to it. They've walled it off. Only preferred partners, like Samsung, are allowed to dabble in it now. And so, too, will Meta go that route with ActivityPub if we let them.
Excellent post, and it is truly heartbreaking stuff. We know Eugen signed an NDA with Meta which just seals the deal for me given the other refusals to answer basic questions. I think he is probably a person who is finding validation for something he's worked on for a very long time, and Meta is blinding him. But that's what they do. They are emotional manipulators by trade.
This is exactly what happened with RCS. Sure, it is an open standard. But Google EEE'd it by adding proprietary functionality using their near unlimited budget and influence, then built it all around their own proprietary middleware, like Jive, to lock out others. Some of the most popular messaging apps, including Signal, had been begging Google for RCS access for years. Google refuses, because they firmly control it now. Only a handful of partners get to access the supposedly "open" standard which Google has co-opted. Sure, you could pour resources into the old, unmaintained RCS standard from over a decade ago. Before Google essentially killed it by moving proprietary and snuffing it out. But then it wouldn't work with Google's RCS, and Google's RCS is what people know as RCS at this point.
Meta will do the same thing with ActivityPub specifically, and decentralized social media in general. They will EEE their way to the finish line. They will wall it all off and prevent account portability and cross-communication outside of a preferred partner network. I could see them walling it off to the Meta-owned properties as they seek ways to further tie Facebook, Instagram, and Whatsapp together under a common protocol which they've EEE'd.