If you’re not happy with the software there’s a good chance others are also dissatisfied and van make the chage, this happens all the time. Perhaps some of them are children without a full time job and don’t mind spending time understanding something ;-) The point I’m making is that the users of the software have an additional option not available to closed source software.

And at any time you or someone else who is likewise pissed off can fork the software and put it straight

I may have xome later to both, I find either very usable + no ads

And you’re stuck with potential security issues/missing regulatory chages, lack of new features…

Like Lemmy is to Reddit, FOSS clients are to paid alternatives.

The only way I can see to stay clear of business practices I don’t like is to support the FOSS model.

I’m not saying Sync isn’t a good client, or that the dev has anything other than the best intersts of his users in mind, it’s that at any point a decision can be made which you have no control over. Service models for software, for example, very rarely seems to be in the users interests.

Give the FOSS clients a shot, they are also constantly improving!

I also find it very unlikely that someone having issues with Twitter is going to find any more joy using “Twitter” by another name, by another giant tech company

I’m struggling to think of a reason that Meta is implementing ActivityPub protocol in Threads. There are a couple of possible reasons:

• access to an instant user base
• potential to influence a worrying rival

What I can’t figure out is how they intend to make money while allowing external instances access to the content? After all, any client could be used to strip out ads. It just doesn’t feel like it benefits Meta.

It leaves me a bit worried that they intend to divert the protocol in some way.