I just want to make this clear I'm also anti-meta and that's why I want them to feel a need to open up for users to make it easier to switch platforms.
I would trust them as much as any other new instance of any other platform that joins the Fendiverse. That's my point.
Yes by making it like a one-click Join from their other very popular platform "Instagram" and advertising it there.
That's (most probably) why threads is currently not available in the EU. Gatekeeper practices like this would be illegal with the Digital Markets Act. But honestly it would be very easy to get around this. Just make it possible to join without an Instagram account. So I guess there are more concerns from Meta to not fullfil EU Standards than just this.
Sooo I guess EU finally did a good job here.
Actually I still think meta doing activity pub would be overall a good thing and a win for all of us. Users should decide what will be the best platform for them to use, free from any content locking reasons.
Meta being able to create completely new social network overnight and still getting more users then entire Fendiverse without the need to open up anything... That feels more like a loose for me.
But this is a very unpopular opinion here.
Yes and no.
For most countries download such things isn't illegal but uploading/distributing them is. You are allowed to make a backup copy of your game but you are not allowed to share this with anyone else without permission of the copyright owner.
There are always all kind of directions and forces in all of politics not only in EU.
That's why we need to always watch the voted representants all the time. Sadly many people only see democracy as something you started to deal with two weeks before a main election...
I do not understand how this should be interconnected. Why would the chat control law make Linux illegal? And isn't this a completely different topic? OPs post was about "Cyber Resilience Act" and like @zero_iq already explained Open Source software is explicitly excluded from this.
But beside this I thing the chat control law is a very bad idea that really need more focus in mainstream media.
Meanwhile my cat after reading this theory...
I think you misunderstood the purpose of this. This is not for citizens to join it's an instance for government officials and offices. This is very good practice to prove a account is the official account.
But honestly I have more trust in my government to not exploit on me then I have in meta/Twitter.
If I understood this correct from my interpretation of the dutch server description this is an Instance for dutch government officials.
At least Germany also has such a mastodon instance too for quite a while now. So people on mastodon know that an account there is officially a government account. The BSI (German Office for cyber security) and other offices post there.
This is not an Instance for "normal people" to register on.
Because I don't see issues there that needs to be addressed. Maybe you missed it or just don't understand it.
The first one is an article from Eugan (Gargron) why meta will not be able to push you Abba or get your personal network data even if an mastodon instance is federating with them.
The second is a (very opiniated and polarizing) how evil companies "killed" open social technologies in the past... Despite the fact that XMPP is not deat. So I really don't get what should be the problems after all.
Actually I read it. I just don't find it true what was written in the second article.
XMPP and the existing Fendiverse is a completely different situation. Why should the Fedivers loos anything by federating with meta? How should that work? The worst case scenario if we federate with meta is that we go back to where we are now.
The panic that is correctly happening because of all this is much worst then what ever meta could do. IMHO
Yes I read it and I simply do not agree with most of what is said there. XMPP is not dead and saying google killed it on purpose is to much of a simplification.
Worst thing that could happen if we federat with meta and decide on some point that this is a bad instance and block it, is that we go back to where we are now.
But since some governments and news companies already started to run their own mastodon instances it would be easiest for them to just keep up their own instance and federate with threads instead of creating another account on threads.
This plus all de Content created by people from the "free fedivers" would meta bring into a situation where they would want to be federated and therefore would (to an extent) do stuff to satisfy other instances. Our position against meta would be much stronger than how it is now.
So definitely not growing at all cost but excluding all form of commercial use of the fedivers by default would lead to fedivers remaining just a footnote in society without changing anything.
So I want not only meta but all of the big player to use ActivityPup and fighting for our (the users) favor without all their lockin tricks.