all 32 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 38 points 1 year ago (12 children)

This is big. Bluesky is getting lots of traction with normies who want off Twitter. Mastodon and pleroma and pixelfed all about to become much more discoverable

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [+] 39 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (12 children)
  • Exactly. It is a huge, authoritarian, corporate platform that can absolutely ruin the fedi if it ever turns against us (think ads, bad moderation, nudging campaigns, etc).

    Its not at all as black and white as threads is but it is still a huge problem.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I dunno. I still posts from the Bluesky bridge getting boosts. This might not be as bad Threads.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Why would they protest and make it opt in? The whole point of the fediverse is that your posts are completely public. Literally anyone and anything can scrape it, your server would hand it to them on a silver platter. That's the point.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    I've once been downvoted to oblivion for not defederating threads.com before it even went online. Fediverse people are weird.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Eh, I think rejecting anything associated with Meta seems perfectly normal for people trying to get away from corporate social media.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    And I think letting everyone decide for themselves how they run their instances and who they federate with is an important cornerstone of the fediverse. I'm more than fine with people not wanting to interact with threads. But what happens on my tiny instance with me as the only active user shouldn't be cause for outrage.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    My unpopular opinion is that we should federate with threads. "Embrace extend extinguish" would depend on existing fediverse users migrating to threads. Quite frankly, I don't see that happening. In fact, if there's no federation, there's more incentive to use threads to have a presence.

    Embrace extend extinguish, if done on the fediverse, may cause an uptick in signups on other instances, and when extinguished, a portion of those users would leave.

    With the Google Chat / XMPP thing, people were using Google Chat, had xmpp support, it was cool, then google pulled the rug so users seemingly dropped.

    I don't think Meta has enough goodwill at all to even convince it's own users to return to it's platforms these days. I think Bluesky is more of a risk as it claims to be decentralised to rope people in, but isn't.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 11 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Watch then deny it cos it will threaten their market capture lol

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (15 children)

    That's the benefit of Bluesky being totally centralized, not built with any capability for federation: When they decide to add some, they can hardly fail to see that it's best to go with ActivityPub.

  • source
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [+] [S] 8 points 1 year ago (14 children)
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (13 children)

    Hmm, let's see if I remember the terminology correctly:

    Client apps have nothing to do with it, obviously.

    Alternate appviews have nothing to do with it, except in that they'd presumably need to work with whatever form of atproto federation exists, if any did.

    Alternate relays aren't federated unless there's some protocol for routing messages between them — such as ActivityPub.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [+] [S] 15 points 1 year ago (12 children)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (11 children)

    Right... it did take me a minute to remember how the relays work. Well, when there are a few hundred of them we'll see how it goes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [+] [S] 1 point 1 year ago (10 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (9 children)

    Really? I thought there were only two. How are the small ones able to afford the bandwidth to monitor everything from every PDS?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [+] [S] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    If they don't crawl the entire network then most of the network cannot contact them at all? Which makes it ... not really a network. That's where federation would come in.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    because hosting a full-network relay is super cheap, including bandwidth. there are multiple people who are running full-network relays (monitoring and relaying everything from every PDS) for less than 30USD per month

    https://fediversereport.com/atmosphere-report-116/

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    This news probably deserve its own post

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    i think the main takeaway is that the fediverse has hugely overindexed on relays being this big huge centralising force in the atproto network. And thats simply not true at all. The flipside of that is that relays also dont really matter much either. All they do is simply aggregating from a distributed network of data storage into a single firehose. Its really cool that you can do that for super cheap. but its also just a small part of the entire network architecture. like, atproto relays are not CDNs, for example, and video CDNs are expensive to run.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    The main centralised part of bluesky right now is their decentralised identifiers right now.

    DID:PLC is completely centralised. Its not actually a requirement for a did to be decentralised.

    plc.directory is the only registry for them right now.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago*

    Well that's an interesting development, which people seem to have begun experimenting with in the past few weeks. Of course for the time being I suppose it's made somewhat easier for the relays by 99% of the users being hosted on the small collection of official bsky.network PDS servers.

    Some more discussion of it in which there may be hints as to how atproto people might slowly progress towards reinventing some of the things we take for granted on the fediverse.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    Really cool honestly. How big it is is probably predicated on if Bluesky enabled it for PDS'es on bsky.social.

  • source