Kev Quirk (@kev@fosstodon.org)
fosstodon.org
Attached: 1 image Yeah, that's gonna be a hard pass from me thanks, Rachel. Zero interest in having a conversation with #Meta "off the record" or otherwise. Sharing this purely to be as transparent as possible with our members.

The exchange is about Meta’s upcoming ActivityPub-enabled network Threads. Meta is calling for a meeting, his response is priceless!

  • macallik@kbin.social
    7·
    1 year ago

    I think you are insinuating that because meta has money and power, he owes it to the community to hear them out. That’s a capitalistic perspective that seems centered around either making money or having a larger ‘market’. I wouldn’t assume that this is the status quo for everyone involved in the fediverse.

    Also, if Meta isn’t willing to share its plans publicly, only to the owners of the largest instances online, I question their motives.

    • masterspace@kbin.social
      1·
      1 year ago

      Having a larger market = having a larger network = greater network effects for content

      Having Meta join with Mastodon might actually sway people off twitter and into the fediverse where it will be easier to migrate over to a different instance.

      It’s foolish not to hear them out, you accomplish nothing. This isn’t some silicon valley episode where he has some arkane secrets that meta engineers couldn’t figure out that he might leak. Meeting with them is zero risk and he would gain more information on what they’re planning.

      • Azzu@feddit.de
        3·
        1 year ago

        This is not a proper talk by meta that you could just “hear them out”. They explicitly said off the record and confidential, there’s no reason for that if it’s something innocuous. There 100% would be an NDA involved.

        The fediverse is all about being open, starting with an NDA is definitely not “zero risk”, you can not slip up ever, or you’re going to be destroyed by lawyers, this is the exact opposite of “zero risk”.

        • masterspace@kbin.social
          0·
          1 year ago

          This is not a proper talk by meta that you could just “hear them out”. They explicitly said off the record and confidential, there’s no reason for that if it’s something innocuous.

          They plan on showing demos of their product to them or talking about potential features it might have. Boom, they require an NDA.

          I don’t think you understand how the professional world works or how common NDAs are. I’ve signed NDAs while going through interview processes at FAANG and other large companies just so that we can talk freely about projects I might work on. Especially for a company like Facebook where everything they do will get about a dozen news articles written, they’re going to make you sign an NDA for any conversation about an unreleased product.

          • Azzu@feddit.de
            1·
            1 year ago

            I don’t think your assumption on how well I understand how the professional world works is correct.

            I understand very well that signing any NDA is by no means “zero risk”, it has a definite risk attached to it. Declining it is costly in some way, but also has definite advantages.

            I also understand that very rarely is the phrasing ever “this conversation will be off the record”, but rather some phrasing including the specific topics that may not be shared, like you say for example, product details. Blanket phrasings like this are always very sketchy.

    • cendawanita@kbin.social
      0·
      1 year ago

      @macallik and if you scroll down the comments, Byron from Universeodon, who did take the earlier meeting, did provide some vague points from the meeting. Relating to your point about big instances, it seems likely that FB wants to throw money at them so that they won’t become overwhelmed by the ensuing traffic (unlike the rest of us, I guess…) so they can demonstrate that the Instagram bridge (it’s an IG product) works.

      @giallo @madjo @nameless_prole @stevecrox