• 0x1C3B00DA@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    You can’t really Embrace, Extend, Extinguish an open standard. Anybody can continue to use the unextended version and that’s exactly what would happen if Meta tried it. They can’t force servers to update or implement meta-specific features

    • Adanisi@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You could say the same thing about any EEE strategy against anything not proprietary. However, evidently it works.

      • 0x1C3B00DA@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        No it doesn’t because you can’t extinguish a publically available standard when anybody can write their own software. XMPP is the horror story used to warn about EEE, but it still exists. The fediverse is a small network right now. If Meta tried to EEE it, server admins who don’t want to participate in a Meta-controlled network would not implement Meta’s extensions. The network would splinter into a Meta-fediverse and the actual fediverse, which would be smaller than it is now but still exist as a free and open network that could continue to grow.

        They can’t turn off our servers, or force us to implement their tech, or stop us from implementing freedom/privacy preserving features.

        EDIT: The reason EEE did so much damage to XMPP was because most users weren’t aware of it. XMPP got so big because non-tech savvy users didn’t even know they were using it. So when Google starting phasing it out users didn’t even realize it, they only maybe realized they couldn’t talk to one or two people now. But the fediverse has always been an explicit alternative to corporate social media and advertised that it is built on open standards that are not controlled by corporations. Its one of the key factors in a lot of the userbase’s decision to be here. If a split were to happen, that would leave the remaining open fediverse still large enough to sustain itself (even if its smaller than it is at this moment).

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            User adoption here is also “basically zero.”

            Lemmy is a rounding error in population versus larger sites. It’s a walled garden.

            You cannot weaken the fediverse more than the near-total lack of adoption that already exists.

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

                Assuming it is picked up and dropped, the fediverse is completely unchanged. That’s my point.

                • 0x1C3B00DA@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  exactly! The end result of EEE is basically the state we’re already in. I also don’t believe that’s what Meta intends. Despite how a lot of ppl here feel about it, the fediverse isn’t worth the effort of EEE. I think its more likely that Meta knows it’s on its last leg and is looking for something to latch on to (see also: their failed metaverse initiative). And the EU’s recent regulatory drive probably makes the fediverse look even more useful for Meta to attach itself to