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

Bluesky adds direct messages

bsky.social

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 208 posts

Re: Bluesky adds direct messages

#21

Post by ethbr1 »

ncallaway wrote: post #19
TheBlight wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought the entire point of Bluesky was that it was to be decentralized? Did that change?

From using Bluesky it feels like the goal is to build a social media experience that’s as decentralized as possible without sacrificing the user experience. So, they want the experience to be like Twitter for the users that don’t care about decentralization, but to be backed by something like ATProto underneath for those who care. I’d say Mastodon is more “the entire point is that it’s decentralized”. Bluesky it’s a…

When you're competing against goliath first-moved closed platforms, pragmatic eventual-decentralization makes sense.

What use is first delivering today's table stakes features 5 years from now, albeit fully decentralized and open?

Re: Bluesky adds direct messages

#22

Post by jandrese »

edent wrote: post #4

It is so far behind Mastodon. Both in terms of features and in terms of communities on there. The people I interact with on BlueSky are nice, and the website is serviceable. But like Pebble / T2, I just don't see the momentum there.

Having tried both BlueSky and Mastadon I found Bluesky pretty easy to use and Mastadon bewildering. There were so many Mastadon servers I didn't know where to start. I guess maybe it doesn't matter what server something is on because the app can connect to all of them, but then discussion topics would be repeated in multiple places and it all seemed so disjoint. Like the chaos of old IRC networks but amplified. All in all I felt like a babe in the woods on Mastadon while Bluesky is pretty shamelessly just "Twitter minus Nazis". One thing I like about Bluesky is when a thread starter mutes one of the posters, it mutes them for everybody in the thread, not just the original poster. While this might unfortunately facilitate creation of echo chambers it is a supremely powerful anti-troll tool.

The other big reason I went with Bluesky over Mastadon is that several of the people I used to follow on Twitter have moved over to Bluesky.

Re: Bluesky adds direct messages

#23

Post by matsemann »

jsheard wrote: post #6
matsemann wrote: post #3

Impressed by the rate new features are coming. During the first twitter takeover, many migrated to mastodon in my circles, but it didn't stick. Second wave to bsky has gained enough traction that the circle has sustained there for over half a year, with most disabling their account on X. But a few have remained on X mainly to be able to DM. So this fixes that. What's lacking for me now is video. Having to share throu…

Video is the killer because it's expensive. Don't they still have no ads and only one paid feature, buying a custom domain name through them directly? Which nobody actually has to pay them for because you can link a domain name registered anywhere else for free.

True. And yeah, I'm also a bit concerned about the longevity of bsky. Hope they can figure something out, without stooping to twitter level stupid ads or lock in (like disabling api / the openness)

Re: Bluesky adds direct messages

#24

Post by riffic »

snapcaster wrote: post #12
shadowfacts wrote: post #7

Not only are they not end-to-end encrypted, Bluesky's DMs seem like they're entirely centralized. From their 2024 roadmap: > We looked closely at alternatives like linking to external services, re-using an existing protocol like Matrix, or rushing out on-protocol encrypted DMs, but ultimately decided to launch a basic centralized system to take the time pressure off our team and make our user community happy. https:/…

I feel for them, because even if they (and weirdos like us on this site) value decentralization and other related values the average customer just DOES NOT CARE. They're trying to compete with other platforms without this handicap and very people people are willing to give them any "credit" for it

customer? who's paying for it?

Re: Bluesky adds direct messages

#25

Post by stebalien »

shadowfacts wrote: post #7

Not only are they not end-to-end encrypted, Bluesky's DMs seem like they're entirely centralized. From their 2024 roadmap: > We looked closely at alternatives like linking to external services, re-using an existing protocol like Matrix, or rushing out on-protocol encrypted DMs, but ultimately decided to launch a basic centralized system to take the time pressure off our team and make our user community happy. https:/…

It's a stop-gap because people want DMs and implementing them correctly (decentralized, e2e encrypted, etc.) is non-trivial. Rushing e2e encryption is not a good idea (and no, you can't just slap on matrix/signal and call it a day).

The alternatives are to:

1. Wait a bit longer for something half-baked that appears to meet the goals (i.e., something you're going to regret but will be unable to replace). 2. Wait even longer for something perfect.

By making the protocol centralized and stupid-simple, it's also stupid-simple to replace in when everyone is done painting the perfect bikeshed.

Re: Bluesky adds direct messages

#26

Post by ramesh31 »

ncallaway wrote: post #19
TheBlight wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought the entire point of Bluesky was that it was to be decentralized? Did that change?

From using Bluesky it feels like the goal is to build a social media experience that’s as decentralized as possible without sacrificing the user experience. So, they want the experience to be like Twitter for the users that don’t care about decentralization, but to be backed by something like ATProto underneath for those who care. I’d say Mastodon is more “the entire point is that it’s decentralized”. Bluesky it’s a…

>Bluesky it’s a major point, but not the entire point.

And I'd say that was the right tradeoff to make. Mastodon is only marginally more useful than IRC at this point, and is completely useless to the average person. I as a developer have yet to even figure out how it's supposed to work. And no, I'm not going to spend hours digging through docs.

Re: Bluesky adds direct messages

#30

Post by gary_0 »

shadowfacts wrote: post #7

Not only are they not end-to-end encrypted, Bluesky's DMs seem like they're entirely centralized. From their 2024 roadmap: > We looked closely at alternatives like linking to external services, re-using an existing protocol like Matrix, or rushing out on-protocol encrypted DMs, but ultimately decided to launch a basic centralized system to take the time pressure off our team and make our user community happy. https:/…

Didn't the early versions of Skype, which was coded by like 4 guys, do decentralized end-to-end encrypted messaging like 20 years ago? Before MS bought it and removed all the security at the behest of the government[0], I mean.

So two decades later, when we now have so many widely available open source libraries for networking and encryption, that job is somehow too hard for a well-funded organization like Bluesky? That's very sad.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skype_security#Eavesdropping...

Post reply on HN