stux⚡
I'm gonna try to clear up a few things
Meta is not gonna buy Mastodon or any server, this is based on absolutely nothing and untrue.
Yes, some of us indeed got contacted by Meta/Insta because they are working on a new social platform (this was in the news) and they are looking into joining the Fediverse (Mark Zuckerberg also told this in the recent podcast)
SO.
This contact was about a "heads-up" for a potential big platform to join the network and not for a "take over".
[1/2]
stux⚡
[2/2]
People have asked me to 'preblock' this project but I am not gonna.
Meta is not Gab so we give them a chance and can always block them later with 2 simple button clicks..
We would never ever sell out on you but rather invest time to make this all go smooth without everything come crashing down
I hope this clears up some mis-understandings
:suya:
:suya:
Fediverse Contractor
stux⚡
It's NOT platforms like #Facebook or #Instgram that join the Fediverse ⚠️
Meta is working on a new platform that intends to federate
So it's not everyone on FB or IG that joins but a new crowd probably
We have great moderation tools on Masto and other software that can cut them off within a second if needed
But let's not "block everything by default" but first check..
You won't be happt if your admin starts blocking things without even checking them first
The same rules apply to them also
Mastodon Migration
You were smart. You should never sign an NDA without advice from your lawyer.
In particular, any NDA must very precisely define what is being disclosed in absolutely clear language, and be expressly limited to only that information. There must be a term for the NDA no longer than 3 years. Six months or one year for information that has immediate currency, but no lasting significance. The NDA should release if the info becomes public knowledge.
1/
stux⚡
@MagicLike @mastodonmigration yeah...
this was so nice :nkoinhaleorexhale:
Mastodon Migration
So, seems like this thread confirms:
1. There was a meeting.
2. There was an NDA required to attend.
3. You did not attend the meeting and did not sign an NDA.
Is that correct? Anything else?
MagicLike 🏳️🌈
@mastodonmigration @stux not really, besides a bunch of toxic reactions (lol)
Mastodon Migration
Even then, it is very risky business, and you must have legal advice. Getting into an NDA with a 100 billion dollar corporation is just something that you don't want to do unless absolutely necessary. Recognize you will never be able to afford to defend yourself against any claim they might bring.
Stay clear of legal entanglements.
2/
Doc Edward Morbius ⭕
@stux If US and EU antitrust / competitiveness authorities cannot secure compliance from Facebook and Zuckerberg for existing and longstanding orders, what makes you think a rag-tag bunch of Fediverse admins will fare better?
Facebook are manifestly bad-faith and untrustworthy actors. Preblock, now.
Facebook is a repeat violator at the FTC. There was a consent decree that goes back close to a decade, which the FTC in 2019 found that they violated. The recent news suggests that they may have also been in violation of this latest consent order. And that is really prompting a step back and a close look at: What does it take to make sure that firms across the board are actually complying with the law? ... I think when you have companies that are repeatedly before a law-enforcement agency, you need to ask serious questions about whether these companies are recidivist and whether they have a challenge in abiding by existing laws.
-- Lina Khan, Chair of the US Federal Trade Commission, interviewed by Kara Swisher,15 May 2023
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2023/05/on-with-kara-swisher-ftc-chair-lina-khan-on-ai-and-musk.html
At the very least, a precondition for any cooperation would be full compliance with existing antitrust actions, sanctions, consent orders, and the like, for a period at least as long as noncompliance (so, at least ten years in the case of the order found in violation in 2019).
Edit: s/Swischer/Swisher/. Clarified and corrected out-of-compliance period regarding consent orders.
#Facebook #Meta #MetaBlock #KaraSwisher #LinaKhan #USFTC #Antitrust #Monopoly #EmbraceExtendExtinguish #EternalSeptember #MarkZuckerberg #FuckZuck #FuckFacebook
Jon
@dredmorbius Yeah really. I've talked with several admins who have described their position with Meta as "trust but verify". First of all why would you trust them? Secondly how on earth do you think you'll verify their bad behavior? smh.
Doc Edward Morbius ⭕
Calling out an edit above, just so others don't miss it.
I'd initially read Khan's comments as saying that there was a 2019 consent order that FB had been noncompliant with.
No, there was a consent decree a decade old (unclear if now or in 2019) that the FTC found hadn't been complied with in 2019.
I suspect that's the 2012 order described here:
Jon
@dredmorbius it's both! In 2019 FB settled charges that they had violated the 2012 consent order, paid a $5B fine (without admitting guilt), and signed another consent order. Now the FTC's saying they violated the 2019 consent order as well.
Doc Edward Morbius ⭕
@staidwinnow Scale. Capability. Demonstrated malevolence. Demonstrated violation of past pledges and agreements. A history of scorched-earth tactics against previous rivals.
Contact with Facebook by the Fediverse would all but certainly prove violently disruptive if not fatal. Hell, it's very nearly impossible to even discuss the matter without bifurcating the network.
Or if that's too long/didn't for you: the risks are too great, and there's absolutely no basis for trust.
I really don't care to discuss this further with you as this is all painfully obvious and your failure to grasp these points is beyond my own ken.
Staid Winnow
@dredmorbius No, it doesn’t. It asserts that Facebook must be assumed to be malevolent and must be pre-blocked.
My query is why? Why can’t it be blocked later? Decentralization doesn’t require pre-blocking.
Doc Edward Morbius ⭕
@staidwinnow Oddly enough, the toot you're responding to explains precisely why.
Amongst the various powers and strengths of decentralisation is taking preemptive protective action.
Staid Winnow
Why not wait, and block later if they actually violate any inviolable edicts, rules, or norms of the Fediverse?
I thought the decentralization was supposed to be resilient to any douchebaggery. This might be a good test.
Mastodon Migration
No, this is not good advice. You do not want to be signing things you think are unenforceable.
Mastodon Migration
One more thing. You should avoid NDAs, but any NDA you sign should be a "mutual NDA", that requires them to safeguard any information disclosed by you to them.
3/
Adirondack :toad:
@mastodonmigration @stux @MagicLike
Or, only sign NDAs that you can see are unenforceable, which most of them are.
misfit loser zealot patatas
@kevinrns https://fedipact.online/
made by @vantablack
EDIT: for clarity - the following are instances that have said they will BLOCK META :)
EDIT 2: ADMINS, please sign at https://cryptpad.fr/form/#/2/form/view/Xz2YqIlhXIFXCitQApFe6Dp14O54I6vuqTUUgo8WbdM/
here are the larger instances so far (5000+ users):
piaille.fr
mastodon.art
pixelfed.social
(1000+ users):
tech.lgbt
botsin.space
mastodon.nz
eldritch.cafe
urbanists.social
mastodon.radio
octodon.social
(500+ users):
queer.party
discuss.systems
Kevin Russell
@stuxI
Sorry. You just lost me. I can't see how leaving this instance is not necessary.
This is awful, I feel cheated and betrayed. How much are they offerIng?
I'll be recommending mstdn.social be defederated.
My instance is pro meta, I will be moving.
Which instances are not betraying us?
#mastodon #meta #betrayal #money
Betrayal. #shame
Polychrome :blabcat:
Polychrome :blabcat:
SciRave
@stux ... couldn't you also preblock and THEN re-federate if it doesn't go to hell in a handbasket? Idk man feels like the better option would be to go for the precautionary principle over the proactionary, here.
I really, really do not trust FB. This is making me antsy.
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.