That’s not how the fediverse functions
That is how the fediverse functions. Instances send posts to anyone who request it, unless a block is in place. ActivityPub is opt-out and the web has always worked this way.
be mindful of the culture
There is no "the culture" on the fediverse. Your talking about a subgroup, which has a different opinion from other subgroups. They don't get to define "culture" on the fediverse.
Those vulnerable groups should have the tools to protect themselves, but that shouldn't stop the rest of us from having a functional and discoverable system. The internet, and the fediverse specifically, have always been a semi-public space and searchability has been a part of that since the beginning.
That post wasn't claiming that a search engine would only be used by trolls; it was explaining that they shut down their project because a chunk of the fediverse thinks that and complain about any search engine projects. Discoverability is one of the network's biggest challenges and a search engine could really help with that.
before they end up with a seat on the activity hub team. Then we’re back where we started.
There is no activity pub team. There is an informal group discussing enhancements at https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks but anybody can join that and submit proposals. Any nobody is required to accept or implement those proposals. I have joined the forum and submitted a proposal myself, but nobody has implemented it or even seems likely to.
Also, not blocking threads doesn't make your instance a "meta controlled instance". Meta has no power over any instance other than Threads. Even instances that don't proactively block Threads can't be forced to use any hypothetical Meta extensions to AP. And its really unlikely that people who started servers on a minuscule network (most likely for fun or philosophical reasons) are going to follow Meta's lead just to have access to more people. Everyone who is here and everyone who started a server here knowingly did that on a network that is a tiny fraction of a percent of the size of other social networks; an increased userbase isn't some big reward for fediverse server admins.
Ok. Your point was that you can view Threads content without a Threads account and even if they required an account to view Threads content, users with other fediverse accounts could still see the content because that's how federation works.
Sorry, i misunderstood your point .
Don't you have to have an Instagram account to use Threads? Every service on the fediverse makes you create an account. And all of them can put all its content behind that account; nothing in ActivityPub prevents that
They are different because most users weren't aware of XMPP. They weren't making a conscious choice to use an open standard. The fediverse, on the other hand, has grown specifically because people are seeing the value of an open ecosystem.
When google started removing XMPP support, users weren't aware and didn't care (other than losing contact with a few holdouts). If Meta implements AP support and then removes that support or modifies it so that it breaks some of expectations of the fediverse, most users will move to instances that don't use Meta extensions. Meta can not take your instance or make it use their extensions, so an open fediverse will always exist.
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
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).
They already have those users. Giving them access to the tiny pool of users in the fediverse isn't going to give them an appreciable increase in data.
Implementing ActivityPub at their scale costs way more than allowing a drop-in-the-bucket network to go on existing. The fediverse is not really competition for them
I don't think an admin's permission has anything to do with it. If you post publicly on the fediverse, your posts are public. You should have the option to opt out of any indexing (just like you do for the rest of the open web). But saying its ok for you to read this post if it happens to come across your feed but you shouldn't be allowed to find it via a search is ridiculous. Users get to make the choice with each post whether its public or not, but they don't get to control how people consume those public posts.