I recently finished the episode of The Verge’s podcast #Decoder with the interview to Bluesky’s CEO and it seems a quite interesting project. At the beginning I wasn’t looking really into it because of their choice of using a new protocol instead of the existing ActivityPub, but after listening to her and the reasons behind this choice maybe I’ll give them a chance.
What do you think? Do you use it alongside with the fediverse?
At the beginning I wasn’t looking really into it because of their choice of using a new protocol instead of the existing ActivityPub
And yet, here we are with another conversation about something in the wrong place.
As for BlueSky and their illusion of federation, what’s to talk about? Anyone can host a server, but all posts need to be indexed by the server of which they’re in charge of otherwise they don’t appear in anyone’s timelines? It’s like the emperor’s new clothes. They wash their hands of moderation and the majority of hosting costs and you feel empowered, only for them to say, yeah, we’re, for example, inserting ads and you need to be okay with that.
Everyday, I read something here about why Facebook or BlueSky are better than what we have. I don’t even think the people that post this stuff work for either company. I just think they’ve been indoctrinated and they don’t realise that they’re attempting to push us all towards the very things so many of us consciously and determinedly walked away from.
I don’t want to be part of a centralised service. Even one that cosplays as federated. I don’t want Facebook to have my data nor do I want to interact with any of their services. I personally chose the Fediverse because I liked the values it exhibited and I enjoy the community. Everyday I get to laugh at things, learn things, share things and just be generally entertained. Can the fediverse improve? Sure; But neither Meta nor BlueSky are the solution. I genuinely wish both would piss off.
And yet, here we are with another conversation about something in the wrong place.
Well, this is is a place to talk about fediverse and ActivityPub, and mine wanted to be the starting point for a discussion about the two protocols and how they compare with each other, if it was actually worth it to create a new protocol or not etc.
I was not pretending that Bluesky is better than the Fediverse, it’s just different and I’m convinced that discussing about how others do stuff can benefit the Fediverse too.
BlueSky and their illusion of federation, what’s to talk about? Anyone can host a server, but all posts need to be indexed by the server of which they’re in charge of otherwise they don’t appear in anyone’s timelines?
As for this, it was my main perplexity after I listened the podcast since they didn’t really entered into the details of how the “multiple servers, one timeline” work. Do you by chance have any resource/link I could read to learn more about that and clarify my doubts?
You mean the same illusion of decentralisation that the fedi offers? Where AP is largely mastodon centric and identity is tethered to an instance? Where a user is at the whims of an admin? With the networks being so small those admins have more of an impact on everyday users than Musk. They’re not hand waving moderation. They have a Trust and Safety team, third party, custom feeds, all of the same user level controls any social platform has and goes above that with their labelling system. Especially, when it comes to illegal content they’re in better position to protect their teams and users than fedi, which directly exposes admins/mods to harm and has no resources to help their mental health. You called others indoctrinated but that’s how you come across and spewing fallacies
It’s still funded by ads and governed by algorithm recommendations, right? Even if they had perfect moderation, which is difficult to decide on anyway, it’s still got the same incentives as Twitter, which means it will inevitably become Twitter. They want you to spend more time on it to make more money, so they show you things most likely to get a reaction out of you, which means they’re showing you things designed to get you angry and respond. Mastodon is much nicer for giving everyone equal billing and allowing you to modify that by following people you want to hear from most.
Well, if what she says in the interview is the truth they don’t plan to make money with ads, but with a cut on their marketplace of algorithms &co + with custom handles (aka custom domains)
It is worth noting that what they posted in their business plan in July 23 (1) differs quite a bit from what Jay Graber mentioned as their business plan in an interview with The Verge in Feb 24 (2), which again differs on quite a few points from what Jay Graber mentioned in a podcast with The Verge in March 24 (3).
they also have their own trust and safety and in house moderation teams though (and transphobia usually gets taken down really quickly). they also have moderation lists that people can create that people can subscribe to so accounts on those lists get automatically muted or blocked for you as long as you subscribe to the list. like i’m subscribed to three lists by kairi (@estrogenempress.gay) which keep transphobes, bigots, and anti gay people automatically blocked.
My take is that they wanted to do things differently after extensive research. People here get their panties in a bunch but they talked about why, it’s as much culturally as it was technically. They wanted to mirror a more web like experience and some of the experiences mirrored on Big Social platforms. It makes sense to not tether user identities to instances, that’s not real freedom, especially when data portability is poor and there’s not true account migration on fedi. Fedi doesn’t really empower the individual and many people are oddly critical of Bluesky individualism, yet that’s how the dominant online experience is and more so mirrors real life. People come from Big Social platforms that are driven by their individual experiences so their transition to Bluesky is more natural than it would be on Mastodon. In neither place do you have people telling people how to use their own damn accounts! But, that happens on Mastodon Overall, they have some cool ideas and concepts, I’m happy to see any ideas and spaces that lessen the strong armed centralised grip of Big Social.
I don’t and I don’t want to, I hate it when everyone makes their own standard which means there is no real standard to speak of. There’s a xkcd exactly for that.
I’m using ActivityPub and that’s what I’ll be using as long as I feel it makes sense.
They could have made ActivityPub better, instead they made an incompatible protocol.
That’s almost exactly what I was thinking before listening to the podcast.
But there she explained how ActivityPub was missing some of the feature they wanted because of its instance-centric approach and how trying to change that would have been hard (given how sceptical towards changes and everything corporate-related the fediverse community can be), and so they opted for a new protocol since the goals of the two project were with different aims.
Still not 100% convinced tbh, but I can’t deny she has a point…
She was saying that on Mastodon (that was the main activitypub platform she was comparing to) the choice of the instance can heavily influence your experience. If I don’t remember wrong her main points were:
There’s a local timeline and a federated timeline, and even in the federated timeline you see your instance posts and the posts of the instances yours have federated with, not all posts
A global search is not always the easiest thing to do, and previous attempts of project that would have facilitated it didn’t received much appreciation from the community
If your instance admin do choices you don’t agree with (for example blocking another instance) the only way to interact with that other instance is to move yourself
Moving from an instance to another means loosing your posts and replies, that would stay on the original instance
She was not saying that this approach is wrong, in fact many people on Mastodon like this more community-focused and less-global approach, just that it isn’t what they wanted for Bluesky
Personally it basically sounds like decentralization (instance-focused) vs centralization (Blueskys approach).
The fact that individual instances are in control of their user’s experience is a feature of ActivityPub, not a bug. And it is exactly important for users to choose instances that align with their views - this makes the Fediverse democratic in a natural fashion. Or at least, it makes sure people get the experience they want, not the experience the global centralised entity wants the user to have.
I definitely prefer and trust decentralization a lot more. I don’t want a single entity in control.
I mean i have a Bsky account, I don’t really use the platform since it doesn’t seem all that active in comparison to others available.
From my understanding they created it as a escape from the changes they disliked on twitter, but like in my opinion the privacy settings on it are far too simplistic to be able to function properly as a service. I find myself checking basically every other service instead.
I know next to nothing about it, but isn’t it created and owned by the dude who created twitter? I don’t trust it one bit. There must be some trap somewhere.
Only one entity develops bluesky. AP has many implementations and room to grow. My expectation is that there’s a plan to make a change to the protocol once they have enough marketshare that will make it much less open.
love bluesky;; it has a really great trans community on it. plus both artist and romance book twitter moved over to it so i’ve been having a blast. i go between bsky, threads, and mastodon. i love how threads brought in activitypub support i just wish that bsky would bring in the atproto bridge natively. i’d love to follow bsky users on mastodon like i can threads users
I don’t know much about their protocol, but I find it likely to be better than ActivityPub since AP is kind of a mess. However I’m not going back to corporate social media ever again. The fewer corporate things in my life the better.
Yup. PBC is just a slightly different flavor of a standard corporation. Bluesky have investors, they’re burning investor money right now, they don’t know how to monetize the platform yet, and when those investors come knocking for their ROI it’s the same ol enshittification process all over again. No thanks. I don’t care if the backend is FOSS as long as it all revolves around a corporation, especially one with the roots of Bluesky. If there grows a viable and open community and ecosystem out of that, completely self-sustaining without the need for the corporation, using the FOSS code (or perhaps preferably a fork of it), then that’s a different story and that could be interesting.
Well, there are many different aspects to take into account. I was thinking more of how inefficient AP is when it comes to system resources and network usage, and some other things I can’t remember that made me go “yikes” when I read it. Also how it’s used for things the protocol doesn’t really have support for, so devs make their own solutions that are now part of the AP Fediverse even though the protocol itself, that is the backbone of the thing in question, doesn’t support the things that is a part of the thing. It seems a big mess in many ways, and I believe that Bluesky doesn’t have those issues.
It’s been quite a while since I read about the inefficiency. I think it had something to do with CPU load, and that it’s unnecessarily “chatty” in some ways that causes servers to use unnecessarily large amounts of data. And the extensions had to do with different types of services, where the AP spec is best suited for one type of service (like maybe micro-blogs iirc), and others have to use the spec in weird ways or add things on top of it to implement other features that are important for those other types of services, like more forum-esque type things like Lemmy. Don’t remember exactly what they were, but one thing I read last week was that guy who had to shut his AP project down because he used a method of fetching data, that Mastodon (or whichever service it was) uses but isn’t part of the AP spec, and poorly documented, so he implemented it wrong which had horrendous consequences for him, but that’s a different story.
Add comment