That’s an extremely poor choice of sponsorship for that particular video, made me laugh quite a bit

While that’s true, I’m not sure how many people are using Mastodon that way and if that’s actually the main concern. In the end it still is meant to be a public platform. Not on the same level of “private messages and photos” where most people would probably be very concerned.

I have the same question. Lemmy and Mastodon are both public and as of yet, no one was able to tell me what “privacy” actually looks like for data in that context. Other than the fact that Meta will destroy it. It’s public, anyone can access it already.

It sounds a bit sarcastic, not sure if you mean it that way. One question: what privacy are you talking about with services that are meant to be entirely open? App analytics?

I think the reason why meta wants to federate is this:

• it helps with anticompetitive arguments, because it’s “open” and not controlled by meta alone
• some will refuse to use anything from meta, and threads users being able to communicate with them adds value
• it won’t hurt meta, because the majority will be using their app anyways
• it helps their image

I don’t think they’re doing it to “get more data” or to “take over the fediverse”. There’s nothing worth taking over for them currently and since most people don’t care about the fediverse I don’t see it growing much either. Although I’d certainly like it if that were the case.

They can probably get the data already, it’s all openly available. Federating it’s basically all upside and no downside for them, but it’s not exactly the biggest priority to implement it, it‘s going to take some time.

I’m not saying it might not have a negative effect or that they care a lot for what’s currently there. They’ll certainly want to monetize threads sooner or later.

Sry, I‘m still not following. I don’t understand your argument, are you saying they want to federate to gain additional users to grab data from? Because I don’t think that’s going to be a significant amount of people.

Most people don’t care about what makes the fediverse desirable to its current users, all it does is add friction to them and therefore I don’t see it growing much either.

I think the reason why meta wants to federate is this:

• it helps with anticompetitive arguments, because it’s “open” and not controlled by meta alone
• some will refuse to use anything from meta, and threads users being able to communicate with them adds value
• it won’t hurt meta, because the majority will be using their app anyways
• it helps their image

I don’t think they’re doing it to “get more data” or to “take over the fediverse”. There’s nothing worth taking over and they can probably get the data anyways, it’s all openly available. So it’s basically all upside and no downside for them.

Maybe I’m not getting something here, but neither Mastodon nor Lemmy are private, you can find everything open for everyone already, so how would federation change something there? Federation doesn’t mean everyone would use their app, so they wouldn’t gain any app usage analytics.

Also I don’t get how your metaphor make sense. The amount of fediverse users is a rounding error next to threads, instagram, WhatsApp and facebook. So there’s not a “lot a tiny things that can add up”, only a small amount of tiny things which don’t really add up to anything.

Well, I don’t think I’m the one who has to get over something, but sure. Thanks for the kind words.

Firstly, you can choose an instance that doesn’t federate with them. Everyone can choose for themselves. And second you didn’t read it probably, they’re testing it and there a handful of accounts that have activity pub enabled. That certainly doesn’t make them the biggest presence.

There’s a large number of people here that have a deeply emotional hatred for anything related to Meta and I get that. But these dull comments don’t make for a fun discussion. They don’t add anything. They won’t affect anything. They’re just boring comments wasting everyone’s time.

It’s great that everyone is able to choose for themselves

November 9th, the verge: Signal tests usernames so you can avoid sharing your phone number

Wouldn’t that mean both have to have a connection at the same time? What if one is offline?

Wouldn’t you still need a server in between to temporarily store the messages if the other person isn’t available?

I‘m not an expert on this topic, so someone correct me if I’m wrong. Signal is only storing stuff temporarily to pass it on, so I’m assuming you’d have the exact same costs even if it weren’t centralized. Maybe even more as it’s probably cheaper to have it managed in one place. I’m assuming all this would do is distribute the cost, but otherwise be the same?

Fair enough, I wasn’t aware of that. I guess they added those at one point.

The Lemmy community is probably not the most representative group of people when it comes to consumer electronics. I doubt that most people plug their laptops into their TV every time they want to watch something. But fair enough.

I feel like there’s a misunderstanding here that keeps coming up. The Amazon fire TV isn’t a smart TV, it’s a streaming device (usb stick style) that you plug into your TV. And it’s quite understandable why people want to stream videos on their TV, that’s how they access Netflix, Disney plus etc.

Edit: it’s apparently a TV as well.

Calling names without understanding what’s actually going on is always a great start.

“Smart” seems to just mean internet connected. Basically all TV watching (at least in my experience) has moved to streaming, so you need a connection somewhere. Either TVs have it built in (and show you ads in the output selection menu – I’ve seen this) or you connect something else to it that streams content. The Fire TV stick was a cheap way to do this, Fire TVs are cheap TVs.

I’ve been using an Apple TV and capped the wifi connection of my TV, works great and no ads.

Amazon is adding full-screen video ads that will play when you start your Fire TV unless you quickly perform an action on it. […] “Our focus is on delivering an immersive experience so customers can enjoy their favorite TV shows and movies, as well as browse and discover more content they’ll want to watch. We’re always working to make the Fire TV experience better for customers and have updated one of the prominent placements in the UI to play a short content preview if no other action is taken by a customer upon turning on their Fire TV.” Amazon said in a statement to Cord Cutters News.

Sure, that’s definitely a feature for customers. Especially the fact that you can only click it away in the first few seconds. I also love to have my ads be immersive. Biggest pile of bullshit I’ve heard this week.