Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Stop with the straw men. That has nothing to do with the backstory of why he bought Twitter.
[flagged]
Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters
351–360 of 471 posts
Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters
#352Does that mean after Bluesky reaches critical mass, it'll turn the federation off, like Google Chat killing its XMPP federation? For clarity: I'd love to see this comment and say "I was wrong" 5 or 10 years later.
The network is designed to be "locked open" in a way that prevents this. The architecture is designed to work like the web.
So is Signal, and yet here we are
Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters
#353Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters
#354Earlier quoted context omitted.
That gives me a great idea: If you self-host your PDS you can have video but moochers don't get it.
Sure, but that's Scary(tm), because an unexpected viral skeet is going to cost you a lot of money. In this case I'd expect almost all video to be fraudulent--either in terms of pirated egress or in terms of disinfomation scams.
Why must we insist on calling these things after an euphemism for ejaculation?
Never going to be taken seriously by the public.
Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters
#355Earlier quoted context omitted.
But that's sort of why Bluesky is not really decentralized, just federated. It's a pretty significant difference. Mastodon is federated and decentralized. Twitter is non-federated and centralized. Bluesky is trying to be the federated, centralized option. Whether that works, we'll see. I for one just gave up social media about 8 years ago and, while feeling like I'm missing something flares up from time to time, it's…
How is BlueSky centralized? I could see that argument before this feature shipped, but "BlueSky is trying to be the federated, centralized option" goes counter to what the team has said directly. I could maybe see an argument not based on technical premises, but instead something like "it will defacto become one because running a relay is too expensive" or such. Is that what you're going for?
Yes. In the sense that Mastodon is decentralized because there is no one Mastodon server. One may accumulate more users or be the "default" for the community of users, but there is no Mastodon server (much to the chagrin of many new users).
We don't even need the hypothetical "it will defacto become..." because Bluesky Social was, up till now, the ONLY way to participate in the community. They had 3 million users before federation, and now we can start to hook into what they've built, but the idea from the start was clearly not built around federation and decentralization, otherwise it would have been federated from day one, as Mastodon was. They can HOPE now, that people accept the federation concept, but there's enough gnashing of teeth around the pain of running Mastodon instance that it seems really clear that going from central to decentral is, if we're being intellectually honest, a bridge too far for most to cross.
Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters
#356I 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…
This whole thread is oof. Modern politics, to include both sides of the spectrum, has devolved rapidly. It feels like a real-life version of the Spiderman meme.
If anything, modern politics is better.
Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters
#357Earlier quoted context omitted.
That was quit the mess. Ryan Barrett is a smart guy and seems quite nice, but it was very ill-advised to unilaterally decide to build an opt-out bridge. In general, if users one platform A want their stuff to be on platform B, they'll find a way to make that happen. If someone else takes it upon themselves to copy everything from A to B, people understandably get pretty bent about it. If it had been an opt-in system,…
I'm surprised that the tool in question is Bridgy Fed. Bridgy Fed has existed for a long time and is a very useful tool. Its alternative, Bridgy, has also been used to bridge between closed social networks and the open IndieWeb. Why are Fediverse people only angry about it now? It's an open protocol. If you want privacy, don't publish something for the entire world to see. That's just basic common sense. At the very…
Well first not everyone on the fediverse is opposed to the bridge. I agree that public is public. But there are concerns about moderation being incompatible, it’s normal to voice them.
As for the fediverse destroying the open web for everyone else, I think you’re hyperboling quite a bit, the fediverse has done mountains to make social media more open, probably more than everyone else.
Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters
#358How does this handle spam? IIUC the main defense is choice over your own feed + moderators on the feed you choose. Is this why DMs are not supported? Because there wouldn't be a good spam protection mechanism?
I wish I knew more about how one would stop instances full of malicious spam bots from flooding the services, but as for DMs, my understanding is the fact that everything is public through the AT protocol is probably why it doesn't yet have DMs (though maybe through public key crypto, one could have something). Maybe in the future, BlueSky will allow for messaging by tying accounts to some messaging protocol or services.
Apparently, DMs are low priority: https://github.com/bluesky-social/social-app/issues/1114
Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters
#359Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anything run by someone like Jack Dorsey should be away from something like fediverse. He literally killed third party ecosystem on Twitter after multiple times begging developers to come and revive the platform. Without those third party apps Twitter would not have been anywhere close to the size it reached. Yes, he, Dorsey, did it. I don’t should discount that one bit! Should we give him or people like him another…
BlueSky isn't run by Jack Dorsey. I'm not a fan of him either. Luckily, he's doing nostr instead.
Got it. Thanks for correcting me. I was ill-informed.
(He’s on the board of directors though it seems - there are two people there I think).
Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters
#360Earlier quoted context omitted.
you have been repeatedly posting this incredibly niche complaint for years at this point
I have only brought this up once before on HN and it was over 2 years ago. Not adopting a new project because it is missing something niche is an extremely common reason why people stick with tried and true, mature software. I do not see anything wrong with pointing out niche issues because to some people these issues are important. Because it's broken out of the box it is allowing people who aren't aware of this pro…
Curious. What is the use case here? I’ve spent tens of thousands of hours of my life on the Internet and a lot of that as a sysadm and I’ve not once heard of people accessing or linking to sites this way.