I continue to be squeezed by both sides of the threads situation. I am operating on the premise that people who think I’m a terrible person and this is a terrible instance for allowing any interaction with threads have left and/or blocked, those remaining seem to want to either have nothing to do with threads at all and are mainly concerned with their data, and those who want to seamlessly interact with threads. I have threads limited/silenced on Infosec.exchange, but that isn’t seamless, and it’s also not fully blocking. So, here’s my proposal: I remove the limit from threads, and run a job to domain block threads for each account. Any account who chooses can undo the block (or ask me to do it) and then they can seamlessly interact with threads, and those who want nothing to do with them get their way.

[…]

(Note: this was only intended for Infosec.exchange/.town, and fedia.social)

– @jerry@infosec.exchange

  • poVoqA
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    You are missing the point entirely: in order to put advertisement next to it, they of course need to copy and redistribute it.

    Why do you think they haven’t enabled two way federation yet? It is precisely because of the unclear legal situation regarding content sourced through federation.

    And as shady as Meta is, they are an established company with a big legal department and not some web scalper operating from a 3rd world country.