The bridge is nothing more than another Activitypub instance. You can block it in the same ways that you can block existing Mastodon or Lemmy instances. If users want to opt in to federate with it, they should also have to opt in manually to federate with every single Lemmy instance.
Oh yeah, so sorry, just another Activitypub instance… nothing to see here. But it’s not. It’s Bluesky.
Hey, guess what, why do you think everyone also got upset when Threads wanted to federate? Maybe it could do with their shitty TOS and privacy policy.
And no, I don’t expect to opt-in to every fediverse instance. But, the whole spirit of it is that it’s run by independent admins with an overall commitment to protecting users. Big tech and people like Jack Dorsey give two shits about that. They see the fediverse as a new realm to mine data from. It may be a walled garden, but so what? Why is a walled garden so bad in this case?
People are being protective, because they have something good, for a change, and they don’t want it spoiled.
Saying that the bridge is nothing more than another ActivityPub instance is very disingenuous.
While it may be built upon the ActivityPub protocol, but its main purpose is to act as a bridge to non-federated platforms, which is unique to that instance. When signing up for a fediverse instance, it should be known to the user that their data will be shared within the fediverse network. But, no permission is given to share on any platforms outside the fediverse network, using non-ActivityPub protocols.
So, no, opt-in should not be necessary for all instances, but in the case of the bridge, it is, because it’s enabling a feature that users haven’t explicitly agreed too and isn’t a core part of the ActivityPub protocol. And since the bridge is being made open-source, should users also be expected to track down any other instances that pick up and use it and manually block and opt-out of those?
This asks zero sense as there’s n disclosure on hardly any instance. Also, there’s several non ActivityPub protocols and bridges that have long since been used and peoples content shared
The bridge is nothing more than another Activitypub instance. You can block it in the same ways that you can block existing Mastodon or Lemmy instances. If users want to opt in to federate with it, they should also have to opt in manually to federate with every single Lemmy instance.
Oh yeah, so sorry, just another Activitypub instance… nothing to see here. But it’s not. It’s Bluesky.
Hey, guess what, why do you think everyone also got upset when Threads wanted to federate? Maybe it could do with their shitty TOS and privacy policy.
And no, I don’t expect to opt-in to every fediverse instance. But, the whole spirit of it is that it’s run by independent admins with an overall commitment to protecting users. Big tech and people like Jack Dorsey give two shits about that. They see the fediverse as a new realm to mine data from. It may be a walled garden, but so what? Why is a walled garden so bad in this case?
People are being protective, because they have something good, for a change, and they don’t want it spoiled.
Saying that the bridge is nothing more than another ActivityPub instance is very disingenuous.
While it may be built upon the ActivityPub protocol, but its main purpose is to act as a bridge to non-federated platforms, which is unique to that instance. When signing up for a fediverse instance, it should be known to the user that their data will be shared within the fediverse network. But, no permission is given to share on any platforms outside the fediverse network, using non-ActivityPub protocols.
So, no, opt-in should not be necessary for all instances, but in the case of the bridge, it is, because it’s enabling a feature that users haven’t explicitly agreed too and isn’t a core part of the ActivityPub protocol. And since the bridge is being made open-source, should users also be expected to track down any other instances that pick up and use it and manually block and opt-out of those?
This asks zero sense as there’s n disclosure on hardly any instance. Also, there’s several non ActivityPub protocols and bridges that have long since been used and peoples content shared