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

Trying to use Bluesky without getting burned again

chrisholdgraf.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 561 posts

Re: Trying to use Bluesky without getting burned again

#101

Post by Klonoar »

Zak wrote: post #83

> “you’re telling me there’s a @choldgraf@hachyderm.io and a @choldgraf@mastodon.social and they’re two different people?!” While the author has a valid point about Bluesky having more momentum and some UX advantages over Mastodon, this is silly. Most people already know that choldgraf@gmail.com and choldgraf@hotmail.com might be different people.

Technical folks might. Non-technical folks fall for this kind of thing in phishing attempts often enough that I can see the confusing complaint having some merit.

Re: Trying to use Bluesky without getting burned again

#102

Post by Klonoar »

fnord77 wrote: post #27
CartyBoston wrote: post #10

Twitter sucks because it's commercial. Threads sucks because it's commercial. Bluesky will suck because it's commercial. If only there was a pattern we could detect. Learn about the Fediverse (not just "Mastodon"), it's the only solution worthy of you.

[flagged]

This is like saying “the people who run email are insufferable”.

Re: Trying to use Bluesky without getting burned again

#103

Post by Gigachad »

brightball wrote: post #34
emseetech wrote: post #7

When Bluesky announced they were taking on large amounts of capital to handle the growth that's when I knew their days were numbered. Capital requires returns, and a lot of the degradation of the user experience in the past few years is due to catering to investors and advertisers (who are the actual customers). Decentralization as is promised is one way to mitigate this, but there's no economic incentive to go throu…

IMO Mastodon is the only real place for a truly decentralized option. BlueSky became immediately political in its narrative and many people just view it in the same light as Truth Social now. It has a future, but the branding in very tainted.

Have you used Bluesky? I’ve been on it since it was invite only and I don’t see any politics on my feed. It’s basically just posts from friends, friends of friends, and artists for me.

Bluesky seems the least pushy with rage bait content of all the social media’s.

Re: Trying to use Bluesky without getting burned again

#104

Post by bdangubic »

Gigachad wrote: post #103
brightball wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO Mastodon is the only real place for a truly decentralized option. BlueSky became immediately political in its narrative and many people just view it in the same light as Truth Social now. It has a future, but the branding in very tainted.

Have you used Bluesky? I’ve been on it since it was invite only and I don’t see any politics on my feed. It’s basically just posts from friends, friends of friends, and artists for me. Bluesky seems the least pushy with rage bait content of all the social media’s.

curiosity-joined a month ago, 90% of discover feed is politics

Re: Trying to use Bluesky without getting burned again

#105

Post by Gigachad »

bdangubic wrote: post #104
Gigachad wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you used Bluesky? I’ve been on it since it was invite only and I don’t see any politics on my feed. It’s basically just posts from friends, friends of friends, and artists for me. Bluesky seems the least pushy with rage bait content of all the social media’s.

curiosity-joined a month ago, 90% of discover feed is politics

Hm, maybe for a fresh account today. I just checked and my discover feed is pretty much just art and photography.

Re: Trying to use Bluesky without getting burned again

#106

Post by Zak »

Klonoar wrote: post #101
Zak wrote: post #83

> “you’re telling me there’s a @choldgraf@hachyderm.io and a @choldgraf@mastodon.social and they’re two different people?!” While the author has a valid point about Bluesky having more momentum and some UX advantages over Mastodon, this is silly. Most people already know that choldgraf@gmail.com and choldgraf@hotmail.com might be different people.

Technical folks might. Non-technical folks fall for this kind of thing in phishing attempts often enough that I can see the confusing complaint having some merit.

It's a bit different when someone is being intentionally deceptive. None of the major social platforms or protocols guard effectively against someone making a deceptively similar username to impersonate someone.

I bet the vast majority of non-technical people who use email would correctly answer that the two email addresses might belong to different people if asked. That doesn't mean they'll be checking closely while using email every time.

Something similar is possible on Bluesky since usernames are domain names.

Re: Trying to use Bluesky without getting burned again

#108

Post by jeroenhd »

dsr_ wrote: post #16

>“you’re telling me there’s a @choldgraf@hachyderm.io and a @choldgraf@mastodon.social and they’re two different people?!” Yes, and choldgraf@gmail.com and choldgraf@ibm.com are different email-people, too. This is not a hard concept.

You'll be surprised how many people think they can just use first.lastname@gmail.com and have email magically appear in their account. And even more people have no idea what the @gmail.com/@ibm.com is about. All they know is that some of their emails don't reach their contacts, probably because "the computer broke again".

It's not a hard concept, but it's a concept that was only ever explained in school to a sliver of the population actually using email every day.

Plus, federation makes validating accounts real hard. Looking for a semi-popular Twitter user on Mastodon will bring forth 800 Twitter-to-Mastodon-bridges with plausible-looking domains, only for the real user to end up using something like "hachyderm" as their domain name. I don't know any good solutions to this problem, but that doesn't make the problem go away.

Re: Trying to use Bluesky without getting burned again

#109

Post by diggan »

jrflowers wrote: post #107

> don’t build your castle in a kingdom that somebody else controls > I’ll encourage folks to drive those conversations to community-specific spaces (like Discourse, Discord, etc). Who does the author think controls Discord?

> Who does the author think controls Discord?

I think you misunderstand what sort of control they speak about. I think what they're getting at is "Who is doing the moderation?" rather than "Who is maintaining the servers?", so the community aspect instead of the technical details.

I think Discord let people do the moderation part pretty much however they want, compared to say Twitter where there is one moderation team that controls it all.

Bit similar to Reddit I suppose, although Reddit also have admins/site-wide moderators that clean up across subreddits, so not identical.

Still, seems weird to drive people from one castle to another castle, when instead you can drive them to your own website (like with Discourse). But I don't think that's what the author is talking about.

Re: Trying to use Bluesky without getting burned again

#110

Post by meowkit »

4bpp wrote: post #72
daghamm wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but hopefully it is more free speech than om twitter where Elon wants to decide what you can and can't see. It is well known that he is obsessed that things that align with his own views get more visibility while things he doesn't like is suppressed https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/02/report-musk-had-...

Before the other side took hold of a major platform and started doing it to their ends, "freedom of speech is not freedom of reach", "you don't have the right to a megaphone" etc. were maxims that were regularly fielded by pundits in defense of shadowbanning and any thumbprints being discovered on the algorithmic scale (though they were never so confident in it as to make the manipulation explicit upfront before it w…

Great wiki link thanks for sharing.

Also commenting to reiterate that if one spends just a little time (with an open mind) in any of the camps (X/Mastodon/Bluesky, whatever) its just so obvious that while the messages differ, the behaviors are exactly the same.

In most contexts we prefer consensus - its just more energy efficient! Your brain is going to expend more energy critically listening and rewiring thoughts when new evidence is presented. Its hard even for the best of us.

Pillarisation from a modeling perspective is interesting. I wonder if that could be codified at a legal level, and then anyone running for public positions of power would be required to have their own media algorithms curated by the public.

Post reply on HN