Re: Meta Unspools Threads

út 11. 7. 2023 v 19:36 odesílatel Erwin Ernst Steinhammer <eest9@posteo.eu>
napsal:

> Hi, comments inside
> út 11. 7. 2023 v 4:53 odesílatel Ben Savage <btsavage@meta.com> napsal:
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> My name is Ben Savage, and I'm Meta's AC Rep to the W3C. I have just
> joined the Social Web Incubator Community Group. This thread seems like a
> good opportunity to introduce myself =).
>
> Hi Ben and welcome to the group!
>
> I'm a software engineer, and I've spent the last 10 years at Meta.
>
> I've been involved in the W3C since 2019, where I've been working on
> privacy-enhancing technologies (PETs), and their application to
> advertising. I mainly participate in the "Private Advertising Technology
> Community Group", where I'm a co-author of the "Interoperable Private
> Attribution" (IPA) proposal that we've developed together with our friends
> at Mozilla.
>
> I'm a newb to the ActivityPub standard, but I'm excited to start attending
> the group's meetings, learning more, and hopefully contributing back to the
> community.
>
> I'm really excited that Meta plans to implement the ActivityPub standard,
> and federate with other instances. I'm really interested to see how this
> interoperable future plays out!
>
> Great to hear that Meta finally decided to rejoin the federated social web
> once again after facebook left it back in mai 2015 (with cutting down xmpp
> relations). I hope this new attempt will be fruitful for the future
>
> According to that link shared earlier in the chain (
> https://www.quiverquant.com/threadstracker/) it seems like Threads is
> already over 100 M. Wow. That exceeded my wildest expectations! I agree
> that this seems like a significant event in the history of the fediverse.
>
> It will be once Threads implements the protocol. But I also believe this
> could mean significant stress for the network, as I pointed out in an old
> talk at the ActivtyPub conference:
> https://conf.tube/w/c28fe948-1308-4669-97a7-3c0e08500116
>
> What can Meta do to support the fediverse? How can we ensure our entry to
> this ecosystem is a positive thing that helps grow the community? How can
> we support this standard? These are the questions in my mind, and I'm
> really keen to start discussing this with all of you.
>
> I believe the biggest questions aren't about the protocol itself (while
> there are things here too, like groups rights management or a standardized
> way of moving accounts), the biggest questions are about administration and
> moderation. How will you handle defederations? When will you defederate
> another instance? How much will you invest in moderation? Atm one of the
> big advantages of the federated structure ist that Moderaters are part of
> the community they are moderating hence are aware of context and local
> social norms, as well as that there is accourding to accademic estimates
> about 1 moderators per  500 users. Will Meta structure there service in the
> same way and has enought humanpower to get to a similar moderation ratio?
> And then there is also the question about how you moderate your instance,
> there where some concerns that you already encouraged some hate groups (
> https://chaos.social/@alexis@alexisart.me/110665196718424215) which would
> probablby lead to great defederation afforts against you, which would lead
> to the question, why do you wanna implement activitypub when it's possible
> that almost all instances will defederate you?
>
> Here an other Talk from the ActivityPub Conference 2020 with a talk from
> Derek about how moderation in federated services works:
> https://conf.tube/w/sLCED7n6351UtA7QrvkSnU I think this could be
> instructive for Meta to decide how to implement moderation tools in a
> federated universe. Because you do not only have to moderate your own
> instance but also moderate wherever you want to mute or defederate other
> instances and how you react to defederations towards your own instance.
>

While I understand the concept of defederation, it can inadvertently
penalize the innocent. For instance, let's say I use Mastodon and my sister
uses Facebook. If a disagreement arises between someone from my instance
and another instance, it leads to my connection with my sister being
severed, even though we aren't at fault. Wouldn't it be more equitable in
an open social web to empower individual users to make their own decisions
regarding such conflicts?  Maybe something that could be standardized?


> I do not see any upcoming events on the calendar - are there regular group
> calls? How does this group prefer to operate?
>
> Hah, big open question. There were multiple different modes of operation
> in the past and the group just changed up a few things in the last couple
> of months.
>
> I'm looking forward to getting to know all of you, and working together.
>
> I'm looking forward too and hope you will consider my questions and
> suggestions when you implement the protocol and evaluate how you want to
> contribute back!
>
> Best regards
> Erwin Ernst Steinhammer
> (they/them)
>
>