tech.lgbt is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
We welcome all marginalized identities. This Mastodon instance is generally for folks who are LGBTQIA+ and Allies with an interest in tech work, academics, or technology in general.

Server stats:

3.2K
active users

We, the moderation and administration of tech.lgbt, are signing the Anti-Meta Fedi Pact in fellowship with our peer communities. (vantaa.black/pact)

There is over a decade of precedent that Facebook will not have users' best interests as their guiding principle but rather profit margins, if it joins the Fediverse.

We at tech.lgbt have long held the belief that corporation owned instances are a threat to the core of the Fediverse: freedom for users to be themselves and to be a part of their communities. The 2010s saw the loss of online freedom when the majority of the Web was consolidated into a few destinations, and Facebook entering here could lead us back to centralization. Furthermore, NDAs for server admins will constrain our sovereignty online by binding us legally from disrupting their business.

We are not products. We are people, and we do not welcome Facebook in this space.

vantaa.black
Quiet public

@mods
I certainly don't want that company nor their ilk scraping my data and/or pushing for echo-chamber algorithms to decide what I should see in my feed.

Public

@mods based moderators

Public

@mods Or any other billionaire perverts!

Quiet public

@mods
Hadn't heard that Meta wanted an instance. If this is true. No thanks.

Public

@mods proud that you all have taken this great step, and happy to see that it is vantablack leading this.

Public

@mods Isn't it a good thing that companies are getting into federation? I get choosing to block corporate instances if you don't want to be associated with it. But I'd rather have platforms all use a protocol that allows for cross-communication than vendor lock in on chat apps.

There's definitely the danger of them introducing features that won't be open sourced, but I feel like there should be pushback against that, but not against the first step to a company announcing federation. Where is anything related to the mentioned NDAs said?

Of course, fuck Meta and all huge corporate entities. But to me an internet where at least the big sites can federate with each other sounds a whole lot better than the walled gardens we've got right now. I see it as a small step in the right direction, it'll have downsides for now, but I feel it's a necessary step to bringing back the decentralised internet.

Quiet public

@DiaDemiEmi @mods There are already plenty of companies on Mastodon/the Fediverse.

I can recall Raspberry Pi, which even has their own Mastodon server, off the cuff, but I'm sure there are plenty of others.

The issue is... There are companies, and then there are companies that are SO huge and yield SO much power that them joining the federation would cause such an imbalance of power that they alone would be able to in essence take over the whole federation and effectively make it a single-entity federation (i.e., exactly what the Fediverse is trying to avoid).

Meta is one of those companies. As are Amazon, Google, Tencent, Microsoft, Twitter, etc..

Hence the need for this pact, IMO.

Though apparently with the biggest instance on the Fediverse potentially compromised, it might be a moot point already...

Quiet public

@nanianmichaels @mods I don't think it's feasible in the near future to achieve a fully decentralised internet. But I think this is at least a good step. If that platform is federated that at least means you have the choice to still contact people on it without using the platform.

It's like if Protonmail blocked all Gmail addresses. Sure that's an act of protest against the very centralised email. But at the end of the day it doesn't change anything, most people are going to use what's popular, whether that's good or not. No one is going to not use Meta's new app because some Mastodon instances decided to block federation.
All it does is block the instance off from a large amount of people that will use the app. I feel like that's not a positive thing. There will definitely be issues with a large corporate owned instance like that, but it's a step towards more corporate platforms being federated. And when everyone is federated, the opportunity for equal ground for every instance will arise again

Quiet public

@nanianmichaels @mods I just think instead of immediately promising to block it it's better to work around it. It's a fact it will federate, we should make the best of that to try to build the decentralised internet. In my opinion this just feels like putting your head in the sand and pretending outside influences don't exist. Blocking that potential instance won't solve the core problem of the internet being too centralised, it'll make it worse by alienating users.

You're free to disagree and maybe I'm too optimistic in this, but I think it's better to approach this with an open mind until definitive proof comes that this will cause damage to the fediverse, but I see this as a potentially good thing. If companies want to join the fediverse that means they see profit in it. That's not necessarily a bad thing, it could also mean that they notice how they can't forever keep up the walled gardens of their current platforms.

Quiet public

@DiaDemiEmi @nanianmichaels @mods I've been wondering why people on Meta's Threads will stay on that instance once they learn how #fediverse works. When you are on Instagram, you are shown ads every 3-4 posts and this should be the same on Threads. Why would anyone prefer to be on their instance if they can experience the fediverse free of ads?

Quiet public

@DiaDemiEmi @nanianmichaels @mods

From a @stux post, there appears to be some potential for funding from federation with extractive social networks. I could be misunderstanding. A non-extractive social network will need to respond to evolutionary forces to develop ecosystem services that allow it to thrive. If the extractive funding removes that evolutionary force and replaces it with a dependency for that funding, then the non-extractive social ecosystem won't develop beyond that dependency.

An example might be as I interpret from "Ministry for the Future". The non-extractive social network develops an ecosystem service that allows actors to opt-in for obtaining the value of their privacy and attention as a commodity that the actor gets the value for, instead of an extractive social network "owning" the actor's content and extracting the value.

The damage to the Fediverse would come from removal of evolutionary force for development of ecosystem services if funding comes from extractive networks.

Quiet public

@DiaDemiEmi @mods While I appreciate your optimism, and honestly hope I am wrong, do keep in mind that on one side we already are completely cut off from everyone using Meta products, so nothing will change on that part. The only real problem is what to do with the big instance, which would probably still be able to remain in the federation, which effectively would mean nothing would change.

And on the other hand, Meta has already shown time and time again they will ONLY act in a way that provides them growth, at the expense of everyone caught in their gravity field. Expecting otherwise is very likely to be wishful thinking.

So yeah, sadly we're going to agree to disagree on this one.

Again, though, I honestly hope you're right. Life probably has already made me too much of a pessimist.

Quiet public

@nanianmichaels @mods You're right and I think it's a matter of time before they do fuck it up. I just think doing so when it's still in the rumour phase is a bit early.
Like what message (if any) is being sent here? That we don't like corporations is clear, of course. But that's not gonna put any pressure on Meta. If instances start defederating when they make a mess of it then at least that shows there's something more specific that they could act on to resolve.

I'm probably being way too optimistic here yeah. But I do think that if companies see profit in this there's probably *something* there that might make my optimism a little warranted. But I could be dead wrong and this is a plot to disrupt the fediverse.

The fact that this isn't the first time it's said by a company leads me to believe it's more than just a plot and might be the result of market research or something telling them they need to respond to the many cases of social medias ruining their credibility.

But I'm probably wrong lol

Quiet public

@DiaDemiEmi @nanianmichaels @mods I think you're giving meta too much credit with your optimism. Giving large corporate entities the benefit of the doubt here requires not knowing how they operate. It's not a "plot" so much as an established strategy that's been used by giant corporations to consolidate and gain monopoly for decades. They get their foot in the door then run at a loss to make themselves the most attractive option while undermining the competition. It's how things get centralized

Public

@DiaDemiEmi @mods it's facebook. they'll do what they did with XMPP. participate long enough to bring most users over to the comfort of their platform, then shut off federation, forcing the small percentage to move over to them or lose their contacts.

i literally am forced to stay on facebook because it is the only way to keep in touch with my family after they shut down XMPP. I don't want to see the same happening to the fediverse.

the big email providers do something similar currently. fuck.

Public

@mods This feels like FOI v2.0.

Public

@mods Hey @mcp is this maybe something y'all should look at?

Public
LGBTQIA.SpaceMaster Control Program (@mcp@lgbtqia.space)Dear users of our instance, We have received questions regarding the possibility of Meta (Facebook/Instagram) joining the Fediverse. This has sparked a significant amount of discussion, and we would like to inform you of our stance as moderators of this instance at this time. Given the impact of this matter on our users, we believe it is essential to ensure that the decision-making process is as transparent, inclusive, and informed as possible. However, the current state of information about Meta's potential integration with Mastodon is somewhat fragmented and not entirely clear. Therefore, we have decided to postpone any definitive decisions until we have a more comprehensive understanding of the situation and its implications. Our key areas of concern, among others, are user privacy, GDPR compliance, potential monetization strategies, moderation policies, the user interface aspects, and the choice of algorithms by Meta. Crucially, we would like to ask ourselves, under what conditions would we find it tolerable to federate our instance with a Facebook instance? Further, how likely is it that Meta would even meet these conditions? We recognize that Meta's integration could attract a significant number of new people to the fediverse. We do not plan to block this potential without knwoing the full story and thoroughly exploring alternative solutions. As your administrators, it is our topmost priority to ensure the safety and positive experience of our users. While we are deliberating these matters internally, we would greatly appreciate hearing your thoughts, suggestions, and concerns on the matter. Once we believe we have gathered sufficient information and user feedback, we will move towards reaching a decision and sharing it with you all. Please note that while we are actively working on this matter, due to its complex nature it may take some time to reach a conclusion. Thank you for your patience and understanding. TLDR: We're postponing any decisions about the Meta Block. Your input is valued as we navigate this complex issue, prioritizing user safety and experience while seeking more comprehensive information before making any decisions.
Public

@mods @stux Is mstdn.social planning to sign this?

Quiet public

@mods Honestly, yeah, block em.

Let's disrupt their strategy, which will likely be something along the lines of "widen your audience to other platforms" and such, as well as spamming advertisements into the fediverse.

We don't need them here.

Public

@mods

Preemptively block any such instance.

Public

@mods @masto_ie_support I hope you already know about this pact.

Public

@woozle Is there an official toot.cat response here?

My own vote is for defederating Meta, and any Meta-federating instances.

@mods

Public

@mods Thank you for taking a stand!!

Public

@mods Signed and committed my #selfhost

Public

@mods I read that Facebook plans to experiment with federating. Have they actually started building something or is this petition preemptive?

Public

@mods Agree

➡️ "When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time." -- Maya Angelou

snowdin.town/objects/5447d3f9-

"..The FB algo. started amplifying anti-Muslim content...The military-backed civilian government even spread this content on FB.
It spread so fast.. catalysed a racial and ethnic genocide in Myanmar of this Muslim minority group. .. FB.. knowingly, ..accelerated one of the most devastating genocides in the world."

snowdin.townCommodore Yasmiga CD32 :flag_agender:🏳️‍⚧️ (@yassie_j@snowdin.town)I know people have elucidated greatly on why Zucc is bad, but I want to hone onto one specific event. In 2010, Facebook entered then then-newly-opened country of Myanmar under their “Free Basics” p...
Public

@mods We support your view!

Public

@mods What NDAs are you even talking about? Just because some have been signed for backroom chats it has no relevance.

Only if the commercial instances go the embrace and exterminate route defederation would be warranted. Everything else needlessly splits the community. The users should decide which instances to block based on ideological grounds.

Public

@mods

so much for decentralization

Public

@mods Thanks for this. I think Meta / Facebook has long since moved past any notion of presumed good faith.

Public

@mods this is the entire point of the fediverse. If a group associates with large scale corporations in that way they can go.

Public

@mods signed

I'm just absolutely fed up with corpos :bear_fire:

Public

@mods
Facebook is evil.

Public
Public

@moderators What is your position on this? Speaking for myself, I have zero interest in making any connection with any Meta-owned properties.

[edited to add link:]
tech.lgbt/@mods/11056709269599

Public

@moderators The Meta approach to Fediverse reeks of the old Microsoft "embrace, extend, and extinguish" approach to anything threatening their market dominance. I won't be a party to it.

Public

@mods i knew i picked the right server :)

Public

@mods @david Thank you so very much for commiting to helping protect the Fediverse from Meta's malicious influence, greed, and control. :blobfoxfloofcute:

Public

@mods Thank you.

Quiet public

@CorruptDropbear @aussocialadmin We are still talking it over and thinking. If you had particular concerns we are interested in hearing them?

Quiet public

@AusSocialMods @aussocialadmin mostly that Meta / FB have a history of extremely bad moderation, allowing their data gathering to be used to benefit far-right elections, the general misinformation and destroying democracy stuff.

Quiet public

@CorruptDropbear @aussocialadmin thank you, I'll bring those up when we're talking about it

Public

@mods Wie sieht's aus, @leuchtturm? Ich will nicht schon wieder umziehen müssen :/

Public

@mods thank you for this! If nothing else, there’s zero chance that mod policies are compatible with the sort of safe, respectful environment we enjoy here.

Quiet public

@timayo Have you seen this yet?

Public

@mods - I heartily approve the decision - looked at the list of people signed on yesterday to see if tech.lgbt was on there yet. :)

I assume you've seen tech.lgbt/@cuchaz@gladtech.soc

Looks like someone made IP tables for blocking Meta preemptively via firewall rule, if you're interested.

Public

@mods Literally the whole reason for Mastodon was to avoid serving capital above people.
But it's so difficult to avoid being subsumed by such an overwhelmingly powerful system.

Public

@mods What would it take for you to change your mind?

I want to be able to interact with my friends on Threads here on Mastodon without using the Threads app. That’s the whole point of federation.

I really love using this server; I would hate to move and leave my post history behind.

Public

@mods this is a very bad, very dumb take. It stands in deliberate opposition to the entire notion of federation.