I keep seeing people repeating the "embrace, extend, extinguish" line, but I don't see how that applies here.

They can't do anything to existing fediverse communities. They can't put ads in our feeds. They can't control the protocol. Their users, if disruptive, can be blocked easily, either by other users or instance admins.

I don't use Facebook and I can't stand Meta, but I don't understand how they can inflict damage on our communities. What am I missing?

@Bossito There is a world of difference between them implementing a protocol and the community that already uses that protocol welcoming them with a red carpet.

If you don‘t see a problem, you haven’t been paying attention. Look at what happened to the web. XMPP. Email. Look up embrace, extend, extinguish.

None of what we‘re worried about is conjecture. It is based on past experience with the enclosure of the commons by Silicon Valley venture capitalists, startups, and public corporations.

@Marty

Well, Linux is open source but Microsoft tried (not sure if with success) to register parts of it...

Mastodon is open source, but his main developer restricted the use of the brand...

Facebook won't profit if they don't find ways to make money and restrict freedom...

Lawyers are great at finding ways to do that... and they can afford many, which happen in the case of most Fediverse devs, which means that someone might try to use their volunteer work, profit from it and restrict is use.

Even if they don't succeed at doing that, it'll be a pain in the ass for those who have contributed thousands of hours to the development of the Fediverse without having received a cent for their work.

@bossito 🇪🇺📺🎶 @Aral Balkan