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

Bluesky Is a Scam

fiatjaf.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 59 posts

Re: Bluesky Is a Scam

#11

Post by tobinfekkes »

Alacart wrote: post #10
cxr wrote: post #6

The solution to the problem of centralization that Bluesky has been touted as tackling (and that Mastodon doesn't deal with in a satisfactory way) doesn't look anything like Bluesky or Twitter or Mastodon. Instead, it's just making RSS (read: Atom) suck less. Crazy that no one in the relevant circles seems to have realized that microblog posts don't require anything more sophisticated than what a static site generato…

This is how I've been feeling but I'm assuming there's more to this that I just don't know. I keep thinking, what if we: 1. Use domains/subdomains as usernames by just... having the content on them. 2. Follow a truly basic structure for index (feed), single post, etc. so that clients know how to consume them easily. 3. For interactions (replies, likes, etc), the client posts them to your own server (or service hostin…

I like this a lot. It also addresses (maybe even solves?) the moderation issue, which is the harriest problem to solve when content is centralized.

Re: Bluesky Is a Scam

#12

Post by UncleEntity »

evbogue wrote: post #4

> The DID itself is derived from the sha256 hash of the first operation in the log. It is then base32 encoded and truncated to 24 chars. https://atproto.com/specs/did-plc#how-it-works They could be using public keys as identifiers, why are they using nonsense?

Would public keys be recoverable without having the private key, one of their objectives?

They also say: “We're actively hoping to replace it with something less centralized.”

Re: Bluesky Is a Scam

#13

Post by jazzyjackson »

evbogue wrote: post #4

> The DID itself is derived from the sha256 hash of the first operation in the log. It is then base32 encoded and truncated to 24 chars. https://atproto.com/specs/did-plc#how-it-works They could be using public keys as identifiers, why are they using nonsense?

because they want the ability to perform key rotation

Re: Bluesky Is a Scam

#16

Post by mjfl »

threeseed wrote: post #5

> because of that they are tricking a lot of people into using them This may come as a surprise. But your average cool, interesting person doesn't care whether Bluesky has a decentralised protocol or the intricacies of its identity model. The reason most people are using it is because it's the closest thing to a Musk-less Twitter.

Which is funny because this demographic values blocking, banning, and censorship very highly while these are exactly the sort of things Nostr and Bluesky are designed to prevent.

Re: Bluesky Is a Scam

#17

Post by cxr »

Alacart wrote: post #10
cxr wrote: post #6

The solution to the problem of centralization that Bluesky has been touted as tackling (and that Mastodon doesn't deal with in a satisfactory way) doesn't look anything like Bluesky or Twitter or Mastodon. Instead, it's just making RSS (read: Atom) suck less. Crazy that no one in the relevant circles seems to have realized that microblog posts don't require anything more sophisticated than what a static site generato…

This is how I've been feeling but I'm assuming there's more to this that I just don't know. I keep thinking, what if we: 1. Use domains/subdomains as usernames by just... having the content on them. 2. Follow a truly basic structure for index (feed), single post, etc. so that clients know how to consume them easily. 3. For interactions (replies, likes, etc), the client posts them to your own server (or service hostin…

That's still too heavyweight. You have just described something that is more complex than what a static site generator can produce. My static site doesn't have an "endpoint" for people to post notifications to.

A like is nothing more than a way of saying, "I like this". Think. You can come up with a way to do this that doesn't require you to abandon RSS (read: Atom).

If Alice posts something and Bob likes it, then he can say so—from his perspective, he clicks "Like", and in turn this just ends up as another entry in his own feed. He doesn't need write permission to anything on Alice's server, and Alice doesn't need a smart (social protocol-aware) daemon sitting on the line listening. If Alice is subscribed to Bob's feed, then she's already lined up to get it. If she's not subscribed to Bob's feed (and maybe even doesn't know he exists) but is so neurotic/insecure that she craves validation from strangers on the Internet after years of conditioning on Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, and HN, then she can subscribe to Marge's feed. Marge is Alice's friend. Marge casts a wide net (follows a lot of people) and keeps an eye out for anyone saying they liked Alice's shitposts. When she notices, she lets Alice know: Marge squirts an entry into her own feed saying, "hey, Alice, look over here at Bob saying he liked your shitty Beetlejuice tribute" (which is pretty much exactly the mechanism behind boosts/retweets—except these would be boosts/retweets not of content but of what is known at least in the XMPP vernacular as "presence" information). Also, Marge is actually Facebook/Google/whoever, once they realize how lucrative it is to have this kind of influence and mandate in the next generation of social media.

Previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30862612>

Re: Bluesky Is a Scam

#18

Post by camgunz »

Bluesky's innovation over Twitter is to try and free itself from onerous regulation and scrutiny by governments. Their defense, over and over again, will be "just run 'govsky'", "just run 'chinasky'", "we can't censor you, no need to start Truth Social (lol), also no need to give us super burdensome regulatory requirements."

They're doing things a little backwards, building a gmail before there's a big SMTP network out there, but that's smart. The default state of this positioning now is that they'll slowly drain Twitter of their attention capital ( this is on purpose; their UX is the Twitter UX) so Elon has to respond somehow.

Re: Bluesky Is a Scam

#19

Post by bombcar »

Alacart wrote: post #10
cxr wrote: post #6

The solution to the problem of centralization that Bluesky has been touted as tackling (and that Mastodon doesn't deal with in a satisfactory way) doesn't look anything like Bluesky or Twitter or Mastodon. Instead, it's just making RSS (read: Atom) suck less. Crazy that no one in the relevant circles seems to have realized that microblog posts don't require anything more sophisticated than what a static site generato…

This is how I've been feeling but I'm assuming there's more to this that I just don't know. I keep thinking, what if we: 1. Use domains/subdomains as usernames by just... having the content on them. 2. Follow a truly basic structure for index (feed), single post, etc. so that clients know how to consume them easily. 3. For interactions (replies, likes, etc), the client posts them to your own server (or service hostin…

The biggest hurdle is the vast VAST majority of people do NOT want to host or run anything, which means there is varying levels of centralization, which introduces the issues people have had.

Re: Bluesky Is a Scam

#20

Post by cxr »

bombcar wrote: post #19
Alacart wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is how I've been feeling but I'm assuming there's more to this that I just don't know. I keep thinking, what if we: 1. Use domains/subdomains as usernames by just... having the content on them. 2. Follow a truly basic structure for index (feed), single post, etc. so that clients know how to consume them easily. 3. For interactions (replies, likes, etc), the client posts them to your own server (or service hostin…

The biggest hurdle is the vast VAST majority of people do NOT want to host or run anything, which means there is varying levels of centralization, which introduces the issues people have had.

No it doesn't. The architecture of the platform (like the crummy one that undergirds Mastodon) is what leads to that. Again: microblogs don't need to be any more complicated than a static site.

If you have the latest issue of Creed Thoughts in your word processor, then it's easier than ever to get a URL for it. Choose ".html" when you hit "Save As..." rather than ".docx", and then sign up for one of the unending supply free static file hosts.

Post reply on HN