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

Scientists say X has lost its professional edge and Bluesky is taking its place

psypost.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 357 posts

Re: Scientists say X has lost its professional edge and Bluesky is taking its place

#301

Post by antoniojtorres »

akerl_ wrote: post #281
pfraze wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have multiple years of runway

Sure, but if you’re on a downward trend for growth and don’t have viable paths to change that, runway is just stopping distance.

I’ve noticed this anxiety on steam reviews too, people seem to stress out if there isn’t a continuous growth of a game’s player base, like there’s a totality that we all need to be striving for, even in a federated space, even in a game’s player base, otherwise any shrinking indicates a spiral. Not that they aren’t real (the spirals) but there’s an aspect of putting the cart before the horse here.

Re: Scientists say X has lost its professional edge and Bluesky is taking its place

#303

Post by BearOso »

tptacek wrote: post #298
BearOso wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What investors? It isn't a public company, and it's registered as a benefit corporation. Anybody who gives them money should have a clue that its priority is not shareholder returns.

Your argument here reduces to "wealthy donors will fund it out of charity", which is not I think a claim Bluesky itself is making.

My argument is any investors should already know what they're getting into.

Re: Scientists say X has lost its professional edge and Bluesky is taking its place

#304

Post by akerl_ »

antoniojtorres wrote: post #301
akerl_ wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but if you’re on a downward trend for growth and don’t have viable paths to change that, runway is just stopping distance.

I’ve noticed this anxiety on steam reviews too, people seem to stress out if there isn’t a continuous growth of a game’s player base, like there’s a totality that we all need to be striving for, even in a federated space, even in a game’s player base, otherwise any shrinking indicates a spiral. Not that they aren’t real (the spirals) but there’s an aspect of putting the cart before the horse here.

A video game and a social network are pretty massively different things.

Re: Scientists say X has lost its professional edge and Bluesky is taking its place

#305

Post by slumberlust »

rdiddly wrote: post #144
fishgoesblub wrote: post #4

If only Bluesky could be as decentralised as the Fediverse [0] Trading one corporate overlord for another is not the smartest play. [0] https://arewedecentralizedyet.online/

Bluesky is a public benefit corp which at least nominally means they don't have to maximize shareholder value at the expense of everything else. Decentralization is not a priority for most people. If anything, they actively want centralization, because it's easier. To get those people to decentralize, the solution will have to be dead easy and invisible. The AT Protocol being developed by the Bluesky people looks pro…

How is this different than what OpenAI was structured as...until they weren't?

Re: Scientists say X has lost its professional edge and Bluesky is taking its place

#306

Post by jghn »

JimDabell wrote: post #264
jghn wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never see that but on both sites I only ever look at the feed that only includes people I follow. I don’t understand why anyone would use a feed that includes other co the t

New users follow zero people on Bluesky.

Yes. And I seeded my feed with people I already knew. Just like I did with Twitter back in 2008. And just like Twitter all those years ago, from seeing what they repost, I expanded my network.

People who are incapable of finding content without a "discovery" or "for you" feed get what they deserve.

Re: Scientists say X has lost its professional edge and Bluesky is taking its place

#307

Post by jghn »

lollobomb wrote: post #201
mbStavola wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder why the Fediverse metrics don't count Threads, the single largest AP instance by several orders of magnitude?

Because Threads is Meta's attempt at bullshitting Mastodon users in welcoming a wolf among the herd. Search for "Fedipact": Meta is de facto cut off from many Mastodon instances.

It's like when AOL was allowed onto USENET

Re: Scientists say X has lost its professional edge and Bluesky is taking its place

#308

Post by consumer451 »

michaelhoney wrote: post #291
cmxch wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

No, it’s because they’d rather talk to intelligent humans. X is populated by idiots and bots these days

This reads like a flippant comment, but I believe it is actually entirely accurate. It could be stated less harshly, but it's true.

Re: Scientists say X has lost its professional edge and Bluesky is taking its place

#309

Post by tptacek »

BearOso wrote: post #303
tptacek wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your argument here reduces to "wealthy donors will fund it out of charity", which is not I think a claim Bluesky itself is making.

My argument is any investors should already know what they're getting into.

I'm not expressing a concern for the existing investors!

Re: Scientists say X has lost its professional edge and Bluesky is taking its place

#310

Post by bigyabai »

nomdep wrote: post #172
firefax wrote: post #151

Most of my hard science contacts (physics, biology etc) from my days in student government have moved to Bluesky. Newer academics seem to be starting out there and skipping Twitter entirely. If you have heard of Metcalfe's Law, you'll understand why this is not good for Twitter long term. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metcalfe's_law

So Bluesky for academia and X for tech and everyone else. I don’t think X is in trouble. Scientist tend to form their own closed communities anyway.

> X for tech

SaaS, maybe. Tech, absolutely not.

Post reply on HN