Amazing. W (I kid you not): A bunch of VC-funded European Big Tech assholes attempting to rewrite history by erasing the federated European alternatives that already exist to create their own centralised, surveillance-ridden X clone.

Same shit, different flag.

And I’m sure the usual fools will flock to it the moment it’s ready.

Fuck these people.

#EU #bullshit #W #BigTech #surveillance #capitalism #peopleFarming @nicolasvivant colter.social/@nicolasvivant/1…

in reply to Aral Balkan

eh, in reality, most of the federated platforms came in responses or alternatives to closed ones, for example, you can compare when was Mastodon born & when was Twitter
but yeah, they are becoming worse & worse each day, I am using fb since 2008 and if you compare what I remember with the current state, you'll seriously question why all Tunisians are there, well, most of them anyway
This entry was edited (2 days ago)
in reply to DoktorZjivago

@doktorzjivago @mastodonmigration That Rentzhog apparently have some other failed business behind them, ALSO involving fascist inspired cap... svt.se/nyheter/lokalt/jamtland…
in reply to David T.

No, we want European infrastructure to be controlled by ordinary Europeans, not multinational corporations.

VC startups are only set up to be sold out to the highest bidder, which is usually outside Europe. VCs don't care what happens to their startup, they just want to sell out and get the money.

Other problems with W are:
-They're using fascist phrases and clothing
-They're erasing Mastodon from history
-They're centralised with all the problems that brings (list of them at fedi.tips/why-is-the-fediverse… ).

This entry was edited (1 day ago)

reshared this

in reply to FediThing

@FediThing @fedi I hear you, the reason the US is so successful in building that infrastructure that we're all now so hooked on and deeply embedded within though is because of VC startups - I don't think governments and institutions have the risk appetite for stuff like this. Besides, do you think W creators would have instead worked on infrastructure if not for this? I don't think so personally. We can have both!
in reply to David T.

The purpose of connecting people isn't to make money, it's to provide vital infrastructure.

VCs are the wrong vehicle for vital infrastructure.

Look at the sheer scale of electoral interference through Meta and Twitter/X. Musk especially is using Twitter/X to promote fascists.

These are failures, they are failing society and even getting people killed ( theguardian.com/technology/202… ).

"I don't think governments and institutions have the risk appetite for stuff like this. "

The costs of building something like the Fediverse are absolutely tiny (some prices for scale: masto.host/pricing ).

This entry was edited (1 day ago)
in reply to David T.

@davidt @fedi
The incentives for VCs are all wrong on social media and internet services, the ownership structure inevitably leads to "enshittification" as @pluralistic has documented in great detail.

They provide a wonderful service to hook people in, then once people are locked in they degrade the service to the point where it's much worse and more expensive than the original alternatives.

We don't need VCs to be controlling things, they misuse that control.

in reply to David T.

The telephone network is decentralised, as is the email network and the postal network. When it existed, the telegraph networks were also decentralised. You don't need one corporation controlling everything for global networks to connect together.

Even Facebook and Google used to use a decentralised messaging standard called XMPP that allowed people outside the network to message their members, but they decided to abandon this for commercial reasons. Goverments could have easily forced them to continue.

This entry was edited (1 day ago)

Eowyn reshared this.

in reply to woe2you

@woe2you @FediThing @fedi I agree! I do think centralisation is what helps adoption (just based on the evidence thus far). I am not convinced social media in any form (including this) is healthy for humans. We aren't designed for this level of inputs all the time. Our brains are always scanning for threats and social media is a constant influx of potential threats!
in reply to Aral Balkan

This entry was edited (1 day ago)

reshared this

in reply to Fabio Manganiello

@fabio And it seems like they are going to rely on AI for moderation/filtering and will not ban accounts. I guess fascist would be ok.

The clip where the CEO say they won't ban people youtube.com/clip/UgkxOqOEys_yr…

This entry was edited (1 day ago)
in reply to Aral Balkan

EU: 'We're switching to Linux and LibreOffice to get rid of Big Tech!

Also EU: 'We're spying on you like Big Tech when viable social media alternatives already exist in the Fediverse!'

Lemme guess, the EU is going to drop Linux and LibreOffice for their own 'Windows' and their own 'Office' that's completely proprietary and incompatible with everything else next?

reshared this