this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2023
336 points (97.2% liked)

Lemmy.ca's Main Community

2823 readers
72 users here now

Welcome to lemmy.ca's c/main!

Since everyone on lemmy.ca gets subscribed here, this is the place to chat about the goings on at lemmy.ca, support-type items, suggestions, etc.

Announcements can be found at https://lemmy.ca/c/meta

For support related to this instance, use https://lemmy.ca/c/lemmy_ca_support

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I've seen that some instances have already done it preemptively.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The ideals that led to the Fediverse are antithetical to companies like Meta

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The ideals of the Fediverse is an open network.

[–] Bread 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The problem is that it only works if the ideal scenario occurs being that we all work together to make things better. Corporate interaction in open source has shown that embrace, extend, extinguish is a very successful strategy.

Would we be harming the idea of a completely open network? No doubt. The question is whether or not allowing corporations would be better or worse for us in the long run.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I believe there are many instances were corporate involvement has added to open source. A lot of the Linux kernel is maintained by corporations.

[–] Bread 2 points 1 year ago

Sure, but the Linux kernel is an extremely time consuming thing to maintain and is not worth privatizing for most companies as it rarely is a source of profit instead of infrastructure. There is little competitive edge to doing so. Meta however has a very good reason to bring in a bunch of new users to their platform and theirs only. Considering their history, it is reasonable to be distrustful.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

Open and unmolested by big corporations