Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
Instagram is gaslighting Pixelfed, the open source federated alternative (mastodon.social)
40 points by cristiioan 1135 days ago
6 comments

>Instagram is gaslighting Pixelfed

>Before they try to gaslight us

I like how the linked account is using the term correctly (which has lost its meaning in the recent years) but OP is using it wrong in the title

And that there was no gaslighting going on. The title turned hypothetical into actual. Which means it was the poster that was lying (but not gaslighting).

It sounds like Instagram was blocking a Pixelfed tag. They removed the block and Pixelfed is saying they have proof so Instagram can't lie about it. Instagram hasn't lied and probably hasn't said anything about it.

If you try to put a link to Telegram or Snapchat in your Instagram profile, Instagram will tell you that it's "not supported".

It's very simple; Instagram doesn't support using their network to grow another network, and it's tiring when people pretend like this is something new.

It's very interesting that tiktok allows adding links to twitter/instagram/youtube and other sites right at the profile page.
This is not remotely shocking at all.

We're entering the age of the tech giants losing steam (you can only maintain psychotic growth for so long, then the parasitic phase of firms kick in, as they have no other operating drivers).

I wonder when the Streisand Effect kicks in though?

Or, more likely, some higher-up got the wind of it, and smacked that block down to reduce the Streisand effect - which is the only reason we're reading this article here.
Huh.

I'm a photographer, and I'd never heard of Pixelfed before this. Now I've created an account on a server and am seriously considering setting up my own server (or servers) specific to the genres I practice.

If you do, consider patching out parts of the image optimization pipeline that strips your color profiles and the EXIF data. The platform isn't really geared towards photography photography or it would hold onto such data.
"Gaslighting" Why should competitors be able to advertise on their competition's websites free of charge? Further why should a company allow its competitors to steal their customers?
These companies are platforms for users communicating with each other. We shouldn't stand for corp policies medelling with our messages. Imagine if they squash messages critical of the platform, or allowed fast food chains to pay to squash any posts saying their food is unhealthy.
I think this is totally acceptable to block competitors. But it should be an open policy, otherwise how will your clients or users trust you?
Why should customers of a service put up with that service censoring their mentions of other services?
We're not the customers, the advertisers are. And so far the advertisers don't care about this kind of censorship.

Try to get customer service as a non-paying user on Meta platforms, it's horrible and you rarely interact with a real person.

OK, then pretend I said "users" instead of "customers".
It's now like going to Musk's corporate breakroom plastered in sponsors rather than "the internet's town square" as it used to be described.