What an asinine concern. Don’t want your data on threads? Don’t use threads.
What does that have to do with anything? Mastodon is explicitly setup to allow all user data to be harvested. What Threads supports or doesn't support in the end has no bearing on Mastodon having all user data public.
If you don't like it, just don't make movies or music.
The point is, the idea that "don't use threads" solves the problem being presented (your data being harvested), is wrong.
Also, isn't the 100M user figure disputed, because it's counting existing Instagram users or some such?
and when the EU complains, they get to throw their hands in the air and say "yeah, you made us do it"
If you want to control distribution of your data, don't join a federation designed to distribute data. Trying to blacklist nodes in a graph that you don't control is not a solution.
Information wants to be free, if you post something to a social graph assume everyone in the graph can see it forever.
To me that still seems fairplay on a platform that's designed to be open and heralded that way. Not a opinion I hold strongly though.
"Even if I only make followers-only posts, which aren't public and can't be boosted, if somebody who's following me replies, any of their followers on Threads will see my account name and instance" and also "If somebody on another instance who follows me boosts one of my public or unlisted posts, people on Threads who are following them may be able to see everything I've said in the post"
A lot of the protections in ActivityPub are listed in the spec as "should" not "must". For example edits and deletes.
I think it should be assumed that when you publish content over activitypub it is now public. Any exception that it is private is asinine since you are literally publishing it to other servers.
Yep but it counters the "If you don't want your data on Threads, don't use Threads" argument since you can be two hops away from Threads and still have your data appearing on Threads.