Cool, so pick an instance that plans to defederate with them and you're golden.
Personally, I think all the anti-Threads stuff is paranoid rhetoric and I'd rather see how it pans out. My instance admin agrees so we'll see how it goes.
Point is you can choose because that's the entire point of the fediverse. And it's why I don't understand why folks are expending so much energy writing paranoid pieces on this topic when they could just defederate and move on.
Doesn't help that an entire political party and their associated generation is allergic to paying for the infrastructure needed to care for their elderly asses. Elder care is first and foremost a funding problem, but no one wants to actually pay for it, elders included... until, that is, they suddenly realize that, fuck, no one else will pay for their mobility aids and home care.
Honestly the franchise is all over the place on this topic. Go back and watch S02E08 of ST:TNG, Unnatural Selection. No one getting arrested for genetic engineering there. My head canon is that by the time TNG is going genetic engineering has gone from truly taboo to just discouraged/not well accepted.
My vote: not if you can avoid it.
For casual home admins docker containers are mysterious black boxes that are difficult to configure and even worse to inspect and debug.
I prefer lightweight VMs hosting one or more services on an OS I understand and control (in my case Debian stable), and only use docker images as a way to quickly try out something new before commiting time to deploying it properly.
I wonder how long it'll take before we finally collectively reject the SV ethos that size is the only metric that matters and success is only achieved via monopoly...
There was a time when Usenet and BBBses and IRC was tiny and yet people still found value through community in those places.
Maybe, and I know this is a wild idea, platforms don't have to include every human on the planet to be meaningful, relevant, or valuable.
I honestly don't know.
But the point is missed payments are lower now than 3+ years ago. That they're increasing again is an interesting data point but it's a bit much to be setting off alarm bells. For all we know this is just part of the generalized ongoing reversion to the pre-pandemic mean.
So we're just going to ignore that debt dropped and savings rose substantially during COVID thanks to stimulus payments and this might just be a rebound?
Hell, they even bury this pretty damn important detail at the end of the piece:
Overall, missed mortgage payments are still lower than they were pre-pandemic
Also a) inflation has come back down and b) the economy is broadly healthy (minus the obvious and looming problems in housing and mortgages).
But just keep telling those doom and gloom stories, media. You'll be right eventually. Broken clocks and all that. #permabears
Stuffy and a thinly veiled metaphor for racists who object to mixed race relationships...
By your definition of harm, no artist creating non-material goods (books, movies, music, etc) could ever experience harm due to any one individual's actions. "I was never going to pay, so taking it without paying is a victim less crime," etc, etc.
The problem is this is clearly harmful in aggregate.
There are countless actions that, on an individual level are relatively harmless that we deem immoral because they'd be harmful if everyone did them: e.g. polluting.
But setting aside issues of harm--which is absolutely utilitarian--there are also many actions for which no objective "harm" can be identified but which we still deem inherently immoral. For example, if someone cheats on their spouse, and the spouse never finds out, most people I know would say that action is immoral irrespective of the lack of direct harm.
As for your last question, tbh I have no idea.
So then why post about it?
This isn't a utilitarian argument. It's a moral one.
They want to believe there's some moral dilemma here and they're, by gosh, trying their best to navigate it.
But the reality is: they want music, but they can't afford to pay artists in a way that's sustainable, so they're just taking it however they can get it and paying a pittance to make themselves feel a bit better.
So quit pretending. They've made their choice. Their priorities are clear.
No, that's literally how this works.
If you don't like an ActivityPub participant you block it. It's in the architecture.
And given the current fediverse is already a tiny fraction of total social media activity, if a bunch of anti-Threads instances hive off to form their own fediverse subgroup, it'll basically be a no-op from their perspective. They'll just keep talking to each other off in a little corner by themselves just like they're doing today. That's kinda the whole damn point of a federated architecture.