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

Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters

bsky.social

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 471 posts

Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters

#241

Post by rglullis »

kstrauser wrote: post #215
Repulsion9513 wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Public is public. And someone else will just go build an opt-out (or maybe even no opt-out!) bridge.

Nah. Consent is a thing and this wasn't consensual. Yes, the posts were publicly accessible, but the intent of posting to Mastodon isn't to have it show up automatically on another network. It's technically possible, yes. It's still a dick thing to do and it pissed people off. And again, it wasn't about Bluesky in particular. If Google announced that they were going to ingest all Mastodon content and post it in a new…

> "if I wanted my stuff on Bluesky, I would have put it there"

How about "If I wanted my stuff on the your Mastodon server, I would have put it there"?

"If I wanted my Mastodon content on your RSS feed, I would have put it there".

How about "If I wanted my stuff on the Internet, a publicly available internet, I would have put it there".

This tribalism around network/brands/protocols is beyond stupid. The thing that is killing Twitter is its closedness and the assumption that the means of communication is what matters. It's not. Let open protocols be open.

If people want privacy, then they should use a secure communication protocol and not a social media network.

Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters

#242

Post by jakebsky »

myaccountonhn wrote: post #168
jakebsky wrote: post #5

Hey HN, the engineering team at Bluesky is especially excited to get to this point! We're happy to help answer questions and help anyone trying to run their own PDS host. Things should work pretty well for self-hosters right now, but we're standing by to help if there are any problems. Technical details and the installer are in the GitHub repo https://github.com/bluesky-social/pds And we're on Discord available to he…

Hey! Congrats on the release. Does the AT Protocol only optimize for Twitter-like flows, or does it allow for other types of social applications to be built like Activitypub? For example a reddit-like social media.

Currently, atproto works probably best for public social apps, like microblogging, forums, etc. So yes, it's definitely possible to build a reddit-like social app on atproto.

Part of the change today is that the PDS and Relay[1] now support non-app.bsky record types. This is quite new, so there could be issues, but we're prepared to fix any issues that crop up.

1. https://bsky.social/about/blog/5-5-2023-federation-architect...

Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters

#243

Post by paulgerhardt »

jakebsky wrote: post #5

Hey HN, the engineering team at Bluesky is especially excited to get to this point! We're happy to help answer questions and help anyone trying to run their own PDS host. Things should work pretty well for self-hosters right now, but we're standing by to help if there are any problems. Technical details and the installer are in the GitHub repo https://github.com/bluesky-social/pds And we're on Discord available to he…

Unrelated to engineering but the recent rebrand to a dead butterfly logo[1][2][3] may be off brand for a platform wishing to communicate a more open, social Internet built on first principles and scientific rigor.

[1]https://www.emilydamstra.com/please-enough-dead-butterflies/

[2]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14460013

[3]https://bsky.social/about/blog/12-21-2023-butterfly

Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters

#244

Post by cabalamat »

jakebsky wrote: post #242
myaccountonhn wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey! Congrats on the release. Does the AT Protocol only optimize for Twitter-like flows, or does it allow for other types of social applications to be built like Activitypub? For example a reddit-like social media.

Currently, atproto works probably best for public social apps, like microblogging, forums, etc. So yes, it's definitely possible to build a reddit-like social app on atproto. Part of the change today is that the PDS and Relay[1] now support non-app.bsky record types. This is quite new, so there could be issues, but we're prepared to fix any issues that crop up. 1. https://bsky.social/about/blog/5-5-2023-federation-ar…

> microblogging

Would it be possible to use it for macroblogging, i.e. long posts with markdown markup, embedded images, etc? If so is there a python library tghat implements atproto?

Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters

#245

Post by Repulsion9513 »

mschuster91 wrote: post #211
Repulsion9513 wrote: post #203

> Specifically, each PDS will be able to host 10 accounts and limited to 1500 evts/hr and 10,000 evts/day Can't have anyone competing with you, after all!

Basic anti-spam. Just look on Mastodon (and the thankless job of many instance mods) or on how Twitter gets overrun with porn, crypto, crypto scam or troll bots...

Ah yes, incredibly low limits with no way to say "hey look we're quality, let us do more". That's "basic anti-spam". Sure.

It's actually "you can host yourself and your friends but anyone who doesn't know someone with a server and technical knowledge must use our platform"

Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters

#246

Post by 15457345234 »

Repulsion9513 wrote: post #240
kstrauser wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah. Consent is a thing and this wasn't consensual. Yes, the posts were publicly accessible, but the intent of posting to Mastodon isn't to have it show up automatically on another network. It's technically possible, yes. It's still a dick thing to do and it pissed people off. And again, it wasn't about Bluesky in particular. If Google announced that they were going to ingest all Mastodon content and post it in a new…

Public = consent for the public to see it. That includes the public on Bluesky. It was consensual. And the ruckus was in fact about Bluesky in particular. That's why the same project already supported other protocols without a big ruckus . In general, "I want my stuff on Bluesky but don't want to deal with cross-posting to multiple different platforms and keeping up with responses on all of them" And, "I want my stuf…

[flagged]

Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters

#247

Post by dustedcodes »

emceestork wrote: post #31

I switched to Bluesky but then moved back to twitter. I'm glad that they are trying to compete with Twitter (Twitter is a conservative cesspool), but all of my non-technical friends have stayed on Twitter. So, I end up going where they are. I think the reason my friends did not join Bluesky despite me inviting them is that it just isn't as good of a product as Twitter. You can't post videos or DM. I am not a tech exe…

[flagged]

Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters

#248

Post by kstrauser »

Repulsion9513 wrote: post #240
kstrauser wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah. Consent is a thing and this wasn't consensual. Yes, the posts were publicly accessible, but the intent of posting to Mastodon isn't to have it show up automatically on another network. It's technically possible, yes. It's still a dick thing to do and it pissed people off. And again, it wasn't about Bluesky in particular. If Google announced that they were going to ingest all Mastodon content and post it in a new…

Public = consent for the public to see it. That includes the public on Bluesky. It was consensual. And the ruckus was in fact about Bluesky in particular. That's why the same project already supported other protocols without a big ruckus . In general, "I want my stuff on Bluesky but don't want to deal with cross-posting to multiple different platforms and keeping up with responses on all of them" And, "I want my stuf…

It was meant for the public to see, not to bulk copy it en masse to somewhere else.

Similarly, I don't want my blog posts used to train LLMs. I know they're likely to be since they're published right there on the Internet for anyone to see and read. But my intent was for other humans to see and read them, not for someone to feed them into a regurgitator. There aren't technical means that let me allow humans to read my stuff without allowing LLMs to ingest it, and someone could make the (bad) case that if I didn't want my work to be used to train an LLM, I shouldn't have made it public. Maybe. However, I reserve the right to think someone's an ass for doing it.

Well, no technical hurdles kept the person from copying data out of the network people meant to post it to. It's probably not illegal. It's not a nice thing to do, though.

Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters

#249

Post by jakebsky »

Repulsion9513 wrote: post #232
steveklabnik wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They don’t rule it out completely, Well, > Are you thinking about advertisements at all? > > There will always be free options, and we can't enshittify the network with ads. This is where federation comes in. The fact that anyone can self-host and anyone can build on the software means that we'll never be able to degrade the user experience in a way where people want to leave. https://www.wired.com/story/bluesky-ce…

> enshittify with ads > we'll never be able to degrade the user experience in a way where people want to leave Neither of those is the same as "no ads". They're just saying that they can't make the ads so bad that most people want to leave, because then people will leave and the ads won't be shown to anyone.

Reddit destroyed Apollo so they could inject ads into the Reddit experience.

Bluesky doesn't have the ability to do this. There's no API key to revoke that could stop someone else from running parallel apps/infrastructure/etc. The network is completely open.

Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters

#250

Post by [deleted] »

Repulsion9513 wrote: post #232
steveklabnik wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They don’t rule it out completely, Well, > Are you thinking about advertisements at all? > > There will always be free options, and we can't enshittify the network with ads. This is where federation comes in. The fact that anyone can self-host and anyone can build on the software means that we'll never be able to degrade the user experience in a way where people want to leave. https://www.wired.com/story/bluesky-ce…

> enshittify with ads > we'll never be able to degrade the user experience in a way where people want to leave Neither of those is the same as "no ads". They're just saying that they can't make the ads so bad that most people want to leave, because then people will leave and the ads won't be shown to anyone.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN