The #Bridgy#BlueskyBridge is great from the Fediverse side, but the #Bluesky side is still missing a lot. Posts longer than the limit just get truncated; wouldn't a Read More link be better? And self-replies don't seem to get bridged at all, so threads don't work.
The #BlueskyBridge by Snarfed was soft-launched this week - still very alpha and a lot of things don't work, but posts are starting to come through both ways 🙂
Right now you need to follow the bridge to get bridged (the DM-request mechanism isn't finished yet). I'm tracking the bridged accounts (M->B) here: https://blue.mackuba.eu/directory/fedi
Slowly, but surely my Mastodon posts (this one included) are showing up on Bluesky. Bridgy.fed kicks in. Thanks to @snarfed.org@snarfed.org for all the hard work.
@kern One of the concerns people bring up when products such as #Threads wish to connect to the Fediverse, or somebody builds #blueskybridge or such is that it exposes vulnerable people in a way they don't want to be exposed. That's a very valid concern. It seems there could be shared allowlists that define very specific communities and keep them safe according to what feels safe just to them. Say, specific PTSD triggers. Is that kind of thing what you have in mind?
@gordon
Make fun if you like but it shows that #federation doesn't have what it takes to #decentralise power and operate with consent of individuals.
We're still beholden to server owners.
It's the same problem that opt-in consent laws have begun to push back against, and it matters here even more where the whole point of #fedi is supposed to be preventing those kinds of abuse.
This is why I say the #fediverse is a lifeboat and #p2p will be the shore.
While part of me wants to write off this #BlueSkyBridge business as...well, the thing Bluesky people mock Mastodon people for, there is a little bit of there there. One is that from a user perspective, many do actually feel they've "opted out" of corporate social media, and that bridging is dragging them back against their will. Presumably the same feeling re: Threads.
Now, should there be a #BlueSkyBridge? In my opinion, nah. Bluesky and the Fediverse are very techncially different, and any bridge is likely to be a hack that loses functionality in both directions. Bluesky itself (the PBC or the software stack) could implement an ActivityPub layer, but I figure if someone is on Bluesky and not on the Fedi (or vice versa), there's probably a reason. That said, some people even used Twitter-Fedi bridging, so 🤷♂️
Imagine you are sitting in your favorite café. The food is good, the coffee is better, and you know all the regulars. Sure, you're in public, but it's a public you've chosen.
As you drink your coffee, you hear a rumble and a crash. One of the walls has been knocked thru from the McDonalds next door. The sights, sounds and smells come in, as do the people. A guy wearing a MAGA t-shirt and a mouth full of burger comes over to sit at your table.
I mean I just told people in that #GitHub thread to stop with the threats of suing/litigating against the #bridgyfed developer and the #FLOSS/#FOSS project and I got instantly dunked on. The initiator of the issue got dramatic, despite them not really giving out legal threats to the dev (like why did you feel hurt by that generalistic statement? :SanaeConfuzzled:) I guess it's easy for the #fediverse to just not care how such a litigious attitude can be damaging. I mean, who would want to work in such an environment knowing that people around you want you jailed? :reimu_sigh:
We're fucking lucky that the developer gave us a heads up, an approximate timeframe (where the launch is at least a month away), and was mature in their responses. And even more lucky that despite all those legal threats and mudslinging the dev still continued engaging respectfully with the criticisms and offered an opt-in method that people I knew were vocal against the bridge's opt-out, accepted. Seriously, @snarfed.org@fed.brid.gy deserves some credit for keeping up a cool head and rest from all of that mess.
Yet most of those vocal detractors couldn't just resist acting like immature people throwing out #GDPR and comparing the dev to rapists in an effort to scare them out of fedi. One of the #ActivityPub authors/founders even had to show up in the thread to clarify how those detractors got their understanding of how the fediverse works wrong. :ablobcateyeroll:
I see it’s all gone off over a #BlueskyBridge and I’m just sitting here waiting for a decent crossposter. Just because I’m lazy and copy and pasting something to two platforms is tiring.
Although, I’m not against the bridge idea. I haven’t looked deep into it but isn’t it just a different way of connecting to another server?
There are some very normal people on the Fediverse… Honestly, zero regrets about building for #ATProto and not ActivityPub so I don't have to deal with this kind of attacks myself. My sympathies to Ryan.
Veganism.Social has implemented a block on the newly created "#BlueSkyBridge" which aims to link public BlueSky posts with the Fediverse, and allows BlueSky to access and scrape our data. This bridge is being "forced" upon the Fediverse with a bizarre opt-out approach, which in itself goes against the nature of the Fediverse.
We urge other instances to impose the same block, especially those that are already blocking Threads.
Looks like I used the wrong hashtag (figures, lmao) -- for folks interested in whether Bridgy respects GDPR rules, please look at the post above :blobfoxcomfycomputer: I found the links where the developer explains how Bridgy works within GDPR.
@naan
The main rule to refer to is GDPR article 14. I'm not a lawyer, but this case makes me think that he probably has no legal standing because it would be simple for him to inform every account and ask permission to opt-in.
Even this huge company that claimed asking permission by post was too expensive was still fined, specifically "UODO stated that contacting affected individuals would not be impossible or involve a disproportionately large effort."