It gets tiring to write Piefed/Lemmy/Mbin to call our part of the Fediverse, is Threadiverse now the accepted term?
-
Except that, apparently you can? A recent post I made on Lemmy had replies from Mastodon accounts afaict
Lemmy and Mastodon can interact (yay federation!) but you can't follow microblog users from Lemmy.
Up until recently, communities couldn't follow other communities, because it's just not a "thing" Lemmy or Piefed do. Users follow communities, yeah?
Except NodeBB tries to have communities follow communities. :)
-
Interacting with Lemmy threads from Mastodon is easy, the inverse not so much
Yep only Mbin achieve that :3
-
Yep only Mbin achieve that :3
NodeBB too :blush:
-
I, uh, don't know what you're trying to say. I was talking about support for the ActivityPub protocol.
I was referring to this comment ( https://discuss.tchncs.de/comment/21052151 )
And the word meta itself is used for meta communities on the Threadiverse which have nothing to do with Meta the company. Words existed before companies took them.
-
I used to say "Welcome to Lemmy" to new joiners, but nowadays quite a few of them join Piefed instance, having a generic term is easier
You can't follow Mastodon users from Lemmy or Piefed, using "Fedivers" seems too generic
Previous post on the same topic: https://lemmy.zip/post/33451610
I mean I call the fediverse the federation so I guess I should call it the threaderation
-
I mean I call the fediverse the federation so I guess I should call it the threaderation
The United Threaderation of Instances?
-
I was referring to this comment ( https://discuss.tchncs.de/comment/21052151 )
And the word meta itself is used for meta communities on the Threadiverse which have nothing to do with Meta the company. Words existed before companies took them.
So you didn't mean to reply to me in the first place?
-
So you didn't mean to reply to me in the first place?
I did, I was making a comparison how comments words such as "meta" and "threads" shouldn't be owned by corporations
-
I did, I was making a comparison how comments words such as "meta" and "threads" shouldn't be owned by corporations
Whilst I agree that they shouldn't, it's a fact that Threads exists and, as far as I know, is not part of the Threadiverse but is in an adjacent space. To the point where I personally, someone involved in the Fediverse, am not sure whether it communicates with the "Threadiverse". Mastodon does, for example.
If we were talking about a family of phones called "Threads" then that wouldn't be all that confusing, but when it's another social app then it's a mess.
-
Whilst I agree that they shouldn't, it's a fact that Threads exists and, as far as I know, is not part of the Threadiverse but is in an adjacent space. To the point where I personally, someone involved in the Fediverse, am not sure whether it communicates with the "Threadiverse". Mastodon does, for example.
If we were talking about a family of phones called "Threads" then that wouldn't be all that confusing, but when it's another social app then it's a mess.
Is Zuck still using the term Threadiverse? If it was a one-off, then I'd write it off and take back the darn term.
Ciao! Sembra che tu sia interessato a questa conversazione, ma non hai ancora un account.
Stanco di dover scorrere gli stessi post a ogni visita? Quando registri un account, tornerai sempre esattamente dove eri rimasto e potrai scegliere di essere avvisato delle nuove risposte (tramite email o notifica push). Potrai anche salvare segnalibri e votare i post per mostrare il tuo apprezzamento agli altri membri della comunità.
Con il tuo contributo, questo post potrebbe essere ancora migliore 💗
Registrati Accedi