Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bluesky Is Not Decentralized

beige.party

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 209 posts

Re: Bluesky Is Not Decentralized

#71

Post by Terr_ »

llm_trw wrote: post #67
rtpg wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Being at will of a server" is always a problem, but with federation you can choose which server you are at the will of. You still need trust, but that trust can be chosen by you based off of your needs (and that trust can be placed in yourself). You're on a different part of the trust gradient. Meanwhile there's a certain quality of service that can be obtained with "mere" federation that is much tougher for many de…

We've gone from digital totalitarianism to digital feudalism. This does not seem like an improvement.

Perhaps manorialism rather than feudalism, which implies certain bidirectional duties.

It may not be a huge improvement when identities and posts can't be migrated, but it's still an incremental one.

Re: Bluesky Is Not Decentralized

#72

Post by CaptainFever »

cuu508 wrote: post #56
scirob wrote: post #50

People on mastodon are so toxic. I tried to contribute code and content was threatened with lawsuits by people who don't understand that their protocol is explicitly designed for open data

Can you share a link to where this happened?

See: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34400143

Re: Bluesky Is Not Decentralized

#73

Post by Kye »

cuu508 wrote: post #55
pxoe wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what does have a "big claim" that they have "no algorithm" is mastodon, which says so on its joinmastodon.org page and in its instance blurb. which just so obviously could not even possibly be true.

The news feed in Mastodon is chronologic, it includes all posts from the accounts you follow (and have not muted).

Chronological sorting is an algorithm. You don't hear its dissenters as much, but it's not without issue. It's not always the best way to present things.

Re: Bluesky Is Not Decentralized

#74

Post by newsclues »

arromatic wrote: post #58
IoI_xD wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We never said no algorithm. I don’t know where that meme comes from. It comes from the people who don't know what an algorithm is but heard that Twitter has it and it's making them doomscroll so it's bad (which is not to defend Twitter or other social media's algorithms, but to say that some people seem to have a blind hatred of them entirely due to misconceptions)

You expressed it perfectly in word which i couldn't. People's hate for algorithm is so weird . Without the algorithm they can never find quality or content they are interest in .

The hate isn’t weird, it is earned!

One of the most important algorithms, google search, has become crap. Social media algorithms have become crap.

Average people hate “the algorithm” because it was a trusted friend(ly tool) ands it has become crap and betrayed them!

If we, technologists, want people to love and use algorithms, we have a duty to avoid making them become horrible or useless for people.

Re: Bluesky Is Not Decentralized

#75

Post by Matl »

pfraze wrote: post #3

Read this: https://atproto.com/articles/atproto-for-distsys-engineers AT Protocol works like the Web, where each user is a website and each application is a search engine. The apps crawl the network of hosts and aggregate activity. We have over 100 outside hosts and at least 3 aggregating apps out there. It’s a different model than ActivityPub, which is more akin to email. We never said no algorithm. I don’t know whe…

> For DID PLC, the likely solution is to move the registry into a nonprofit which will maintain it, similar to ICANN.

ICANN is rather centralized. This is the biggest concern I have with ATProto, I would have expected it to work over P2P i.e. IPNS, or even some sort of a blockchain rather than a centralized web server.

Re: Bluesky Is Not Decentralized

#76

Post by Orthographic »

pfraze wrote: post #3

Read this: https://atproto.com/articles/atproto-for-distsys-engineers AT Protocol works like the Web, where each user is a website and each application is a search engine. The apps crawl the network of hosts and aggregate activity. We have over 100 outside hosts and at least 3 aggregating apps out there. It’s a different model than ActivityPub, which is more akin to email. We never said no algorithm. I don’t know whe…

(I've updated this post as I've learned more).

Thank you. ATProtocol is really cool, but I share some concerns about the centralized resolution of identities to custom servers and the conflict of interest in Bluesky's stewardship of ATProtocol development (what is good for the ATProtocol Network vs what is good for Bluesky).

If I understand Bluesky correctly:

When you follow users on Bluesky (even those on a hosted custom server), atprotocol allows you to follow them by a "URL" (DID:web) but by default you're following them by their DID:PLC, a kind of Decentralized Id that is resolved via an equivalent to a "name server" (see: https://github.com/did-method-plc/did-method-plc).

You give that name server a DID json representing a user you want to follow or are following, it will tell you the IP of the (custom atproto) server where that user's posts and replies are. By default Bluesky apps only know about PLC nameservers that are in Bluesky's registry.

And so even if I'm using custom hosting if Bluesky PLC nameserver delists my DID (or the nameserver that points to me?) most bluesky users will be unable to find me.

Bluesky is theoretically interested in moving this nameserver under a nonprofit consortium structure - where no one entity could prevent a nameserver from being listed - but no one is working on it, and BlueSky for years hasn't gotten around to it.

My questions are:

1. Is that right, or are there any promising nascent efforts to create a nameserver registry under a consortium structure?

2. Is it fair to ask users, potential users and developers to take it as an article of faith that BlueSky will fully support and partner with such a consortium (since it hasn't helped set one up already in the years of its development)?

3. If Bluesky has features that are not being "backported" to ATproto, does this not raise concerns about Bluesky's conflict of interest in its current stewardship of ATProtocol? One could imagine a situation where Bluesky "slow walks" contributions to ATProto out of its own private company interest in keeping its userbase on Bluesky servers.

Re: Bluesky Is Not Decentralized

#77

Post by simgt »

zimpenfish wrote: post #53
pxoe wrote: post #43

Mastodon is not decentralized, it's federated. It doesn't solve some of the problems that come with centralization, it just creates more entities that will have the same problems (being at will of a server). And funnily, it doesn't even solve data portability entirely (you can't actually move your posts). Mastodon's "decentralization" is even worse than a "theoretical promise" of one, cause it's a just marketing prom…

> (you can't actually move your posts) You can export and import, I believe, for some instances but generically re-posting them to a new instance with the old date isn't currently feasible[0], correct. You also need to re-federate them to get the "links" correct (and probably de-federate the old) which causes confusing results if your client doesn't handle backdated posts correctly (and most of the ones I was using i…

> [2] Obviously there's other problems such as people creating fake history, etc., if you're allowed to post backdated statuses.

I don't think it's a problem really, but I may be mistaken about what the goal of these platforms is. I can also create a fake history on a blog or news site and backdate posts. But in the odd case where it matters, say for a copyright dispute or something, it'd be very hard to pretend that the history is legit and very easy to find clues that it is not.

Re: Bluesky Is Not Decentralized

#78

Post by ttepasse »

lukan wrote: post #63
toofy wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it just creates more entities that will have the same problems (being at will of a server). this isn’t a “problem” that needs to be solved. you’re not “at the will of the server” in a federated environment, its the actual literal opposite. if i don’t like the server operators or if i don’t like the servers it federates with, that’s totally ok. i start my own and federate with who i like. this is a good thing, not a…

"if i don’t like the servers it federates with, that’s totally ok. i start my own and federate with who i like." So everytime you move, can you take your existing network and posts and messages with you, or do you have to start from scratch every time?

You can take your existing network with you, Mastodon has Accounts redirects and follower migrations. Your own content not yet. While Mastodon-the-software has an export function, there is no import as yet. But that is a solvable problem.

https://docs.joinmastodon.org/user/moving/

Re: Bluesky Is Not Decentralized

#79

Post by j_maffe »

miki123211 wrote: post #54
IoI_xD wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We never said no algorithm. I don’t know where that meme comes from. It comes from the people who don't know what an algorithm is but heard that Twitter has it and it's making them doomscroll so it's bad (which is not to defend Twitter or other social media's algorithms, but to say that some people seem to have a blind hatred of them entirely due to misconceptions)

And to be extra clear, "only show posts from people I follow, in chronological order" is an algorithm.

I'm sorry but your comment comes across as very pedantic. In the context of social media, people mean highly optimized algorithms for maximum retention.
Post reply on HN