Post by @codefolio@ruby.social

2023-07-05 13:20 UTC

@TheActualBrian@mastodon.social @mahmoudajawad@mastodon.online @clifff@shakedown.social @Gargron@mastodon.social Short version: to avoid the same problem as Google with XMPP, Microsoft with SMTP, etc. To avoid the leverage and pressure they gain by interoperating - they can make incompatible extensions to ActivityPub. Once they do that, we're stuck either supporting that (expensive, kills dev momentum) or not supporting it (being second-class citizens on our own servers.) You could say "Meta won't do that" and I'd say "that seems very, very unlikely."

Replies (2)

@codefolio@ruby.social 2023-07-05 13:22

@TheActualBrian@mastodon.social @mahmoudajawad@mastodon.online @clifff@shakedown.social @Gargron@mastodon.social Because Embrace/Extend/Extinguish is the corporate default, Meta is extremely likely to do that, and it's a really ugly situation once they start doing it. The only way that *doesn't* happen is if Meta has a *lot* of respect for ActivityPub in a way that seems actively detrimental to their own corporate bottom line. The odds do *not* seem high.

Open ##2205973
@TheActualBrian@mastodon.social 2023-07-05 17:32

@codefolio@ruby.social @mahmoudajawad@mastodon.online @clifff@shakedown.social @Gargron@mastodon.social Straw man. No one said they won't. If they do, act then. It's open source. That's, what I'm continually told, is the beauty of it, and now it's only open if certain people are not panicked by what one might do. Prejudgment. Also, if they do, they cut themselves off. So what?

Open ##2205987