Are we though? Because it looks like you’re on kbin and I’m on slrpnk.
If either one of our instances decides to implement proprietary features that Threads creates (the second E in EEE) and the other one doesn’t, that could break the experience of us being “here” together.
I’m a Linux user. That “fragmentation” is probably a good reason for why that hasn’t been extinguished either. So as far as I can tell, yes, I’ll enjoy the resilience that that implies without fear of it being extinguished.
Well, you can stick to instances that federate with Threads even if/when they misbehave then, but having the option not to is pretty great, from my perspective.
Are we though? Because it looks like you’re on kbin and I’m on slrpnk.
If either one of our instances decides to implement proprietary features that Threads creates (the second E in EEE) and the other one doesn’t, that could break the experience of us being “here” together.
And we’re free to move to another instance that has the access, or lack thereof, that we want.
Yup, thus fragmenting the crap out of the fediverse (the last E)
I always saw that as a feature, not a bug. The feature that prevents it from being the last E.
If you see massive fragmentation as a feature then I really don’t know what to tell you.
I guess enjoy?
I’m a Linux user. That “fragmentation” is probably a good reason for why that hasn’t been extinguished either. So as far as I can tell, yes, I’ll enjoy the resilience that that implies without fear of it being extinguished.
I really don’t think that’s a meaningful comparison.
Federation relies on unity – fragmentation ruins that.
Well, you can stick to instances that federate with Threads even if/when they misbehave then, but having the option not to is pretty great, from my perspective.
Sure, that’s great while it’s still just “instances that do federate with threads” and “instances that don’t federate with threads”.