My guess, is that they know they can't "own" the Fediverse, and their play is more about how to hedge its success and ensure they own a significant revenue stream from it. So my expectation is that they are making an advertising platform play. All the nodes cost a lot to run, and as the Fediverse grows will only get more resource intensive, and more expensive. If Facebook/Meta can build an advertising product that can fund nodes I'm sure there is a significant number that will take that up.
Obviously there will be nodes that push back, I can see nodes de-federating Meta ad supported nodes.
Maybe they will surprise us though and actually try and launch a Twitter like product as part of the Fediverse.
One of the biggest issues they are going to find though is that so many of the influential Fediverse people are so anti Meta, and anti many of the things that they would want to build. Search and caching/reposting of content seems to be a toxic topic on the Fediverse, but something I'm sure Meta would want.
It's going to be exciting watch, will have to get some popcorn.
Unless you are the perpetrator of some crime, you just have no reason to ever sign an NDA. Or unless you want the pile of cash they promise you. If there's no clear benefit for you, when someone says signing an NDA is part of the process, the answer is "No".
I wish we could standardize this as a developer community, but of course there are those who are placed at disadvantage due to their visa status that pretty much have no choice to sign these things, and that sets a pattern that managers expect everyone to comply with..
Is there some way to promote suggested standards in the industry? Maybe if someone like levels.fyi or layoffs.fyi or Blind were to suggest that we all start or stop doing whatever.
Ie, if you're in the process of developing patentable technology or writing a patent, anyone to whom you disclose details needs to be under NDA, otherwise your patent may be refused due to prior public disclosure.
Or so is my understanding anyways, I am not a lawyer.
Hell, even without specific trade secrets to protect, Facebook wants to control the narrative about their project and thus wants to discourage leaks.
I mean, man, Apple is legendary for how hard they work to avoid leaks, but I've never seen anyone around here accuse them of using NDAs and equivalent in order to cover up crimes.
a battle over this has developed in the web go-go days. Developers were purposefully asked to sign NDA not due to patents, but to control the applicants to rival startups. Meanwhile, certain developers were so valuable that they discovered they could make demands themselves.
There is a clear benefit: you get to hear what they're saying, while without signing the NDA you won't.
On the other hand, there's very little downside to signing an NDA. Sure, it'll prevent you from revealing the information. But without signing the NDA, you don't get access to the information in the first place, and just as unable to reveal the information.
As in the rumor references itself, people are taking the existence of the rumor as proof the rumor is true, but in the thread (when I last checked) nobody actually posted anything remotely usable for even a shallow tech investigation piece.
Like the guy saying he didn't pick up when Meta called. Was it actually Meta? What are the conditions for the invitation? We'll never know, but apparently this is enough proof of both an NDA and Meta trying to force admins to do something they don't want.
I'm not sure what Meta or the fediverse has to gain by attempting to get in bed with each other -- a lot of people on the fediverse are extremely anti-big-biz, and extremely anti-meta in particular.
IMO all Meta has to do to succeed here is to create a better managed Twitter. They don't need to get all fancy with it by trying to bolt on fediverse compatibility.
Disclaimer: I work at Meta, but not on IG or Project 92.
The thing about Facebook is that it is Facebook. It lacks credibility. There are a good few people on Mastodon who produce content that Facebook users might want to consume, but would be leery of actually using Facebook, or Facebook’s hypothetical Twitter-y thing.
And, assuming that Twitter’s decline continues (I’d view this as inevitable at this point, ymmv) there’ll be an ongoing stream of people, many of whom won’t want a Facebook property.
Facebook doesn’t seem to have had great success in the past in bootstrapping new social networks off its user base (see the dating thing, the classifieds thing, etc); it might want to try something new. It would arguably be difficult for FacebookTwitter to be _the_ new Twitter (if such a thing emerges at all); the brand is too damaged. Being _part_ of the replacement might be their best realistic option.
This is very much the charitable view, btw; “Facebook wants exposure to content that they’re unlikely to get _on_ Facebook, wants to work out rules of engagement” (if ActivityPub-y FacebookTwitter launches without ground rules, everyone is just going to defederate from that pretty quickly). You can see more cynical views elsewhere in the thread.
That's the point: we just don't know what Facebook/Meta is planning.
However, we DO know that Eugen Rochko signed the NDA with Facebook/Meta from https://433.world/@Yuvalne/110566872225488614 (screen cap of deleted post). Eugen Rochko is the creator of Mastodon.
Text of screen capture:
"screenshot of a partial Mastodon thread from Tusky.
@gargron@mastodon.social:
@dansup I think it’s important to understand what they’re working on and how it fits with what we’re doing. Even if an NDA is required, knowing is better than not knowing.
@dansup@mastodon.social:
@Gargron Yeah that's a good point, I'm going to give the benefit of the doubt!
The fediverse could really use that type of growth, and it's a good sign that they are willing to have discussions with fediverse stakeholders."
So it has been admitted with a very predictable outcome [0] that the main instance (mastodon.social) is now corrupted, compromised and has capitulated into Meta's NDA and will get even more centralized.
This sounds more like Meta used NDAs on the largest instances on Mastodon to not instance-level ban them once they get Instagram on ActivityPub which of course means that Meta is now in control of most of Mastodon already (the ones that have the most users)
So essentially, Meta has captured another social network without trying.
My favorite was the one person who said they saw the call and just let it ring. Legend. I know I couldn't have resisted the temptation, if only to find out what kind of pitch it was. I'll bet that's something Mr. Zuckerberg (or more likely his admin) doesn't experience every day.
Yes, we all have. I used to, for years before I went there (through personal contacts). I've even gotten a couple of calls since I retired from there, which is kind of silly. I'm talking specifically about a call from Zuck's office, not from Facebook recruiting generally.
I think they need a self-moderating system aka Project P92 and the entire infrastructure and people are already there. Minimum costs, your rules. Next ads.
perfect timing, people are looking for where to go from reddit and twitter. Mastadon and lemmy are a bit confusing for a newbie, I think Meta will fix that.
With this alternative it would mean that Instagram will be the biggest (Mastodon-compatible) social platform out there. Just like what happened with Gab. Henceforth, centralization wins again [0], even worse with the Mastodon admins going under NDA's with Meta to be corrupted with opaqueness and little to no transparency.
As it stands unsurprisingly:
"Instagram's success on ActivityPub is also Mastodon's nightmare and it tends to more centralization." [0]
So I should be expecting mass instance-level bans and the de-federation of Instagram then?
I'm not obsessed, I just like reading stuff about federation. And any time there's a post about Mastodon here on HN, there's a near-100% chance you'll be in there, posting a variation of "told you so!! centralization wins again!!~", and that does not for an interesting discussion make.
Obviously there will be nodes that push back, I can see nodes de-federating Meta ad supported nodes.
Maybe they will surprise us though and actually try and launch a Twitter like product as part of the Fediverse.
One of the biggest issues they are going to find though is that so many of the influential Fediverse people are so anti Meta, and anti many of the things that they would want to build. Search and caching/reposting of content seems to be a toxic topic on the Fediverse, but something I'm sure Meta would want.
It's going to be exciting watch, will have to get some popcorn.