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

511–520 of 561 posts

Re: Trying to use Bluesky without getting burned again

#511

Post by dom96 »

baggachipz wrote: post #430
dom96 wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have stayed away from it for a while, but after my partner switched over to it I decided to delve deeper into it. The openess of Bluesky to developers is a breath of fresh air and the platform itself has some really great features. So I guess you can say I'm a fan now too. I was also able to create an app on Bluesky that grew to 15k users in less than a month[1]. The Bluesky team was really open to helping me with…

I don't know how long you've been in the space, so forgive me if I seem condescending. Twitter and Facebook used to be extremely open and encouraging to developers. That's how they gained prominence, by allowing... nay, incentivizing developers to use their platform. Once they hit critical mass, that was all unceremoniously ripped away. Assuming a for-profit venture like Bluesky gains critical mass, it will absolutel…

Yes, it probably will. If it does then I will move to a new platform.

Re: Trying to use Bluesky without getting burned again

#512

Post by dom96 »

epolanski wrote: post #444
dom96 wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a myth. I got 2 amazing offers (one of which is now my job) via Twitter. I hope Bluesky can eventually offer the same.

I don't think Twitter was required for someone with a rather good track record/cv like yours to get good jobs.

Thank you for the kind words, but even good CVs get lost in the great recruitment filter all the time. It's great to have a platform where you can interact directly with real engineers at various companies.

Re: Trying to use Bluesky without getting burned again

#513

Post by kalleboo »

ikesau wrote: post #482
kalleboo wrote: post #352

Going more to the topic of the article rather than platform wars: In moving to Mastodon from X a few years ago, I didn't want my content to be owned by a platform, but I also just don't have it in my to write blog posts, posting threads bit by bit works better for my brain. So my solution was to write a script that took that any thread I start with a certain hashtag in it, and threadreader-style mirror it to a basic…

this is really cool! thanks for sharing :)

Thanks!

I would have released the source, but it's just a big ball of PHP since that was the easiest thing to use to just pull some JSON off of mastodon and template it into HTML.

Re: Trying to use Bluesky without getting burned again

#514

Post by iteratethis »

mozarella wrote: post #340

Related : Corey Doctrow's article (again) about how he doesn't trust Bluesky enough to move there from mastodon. Especially Bluesky's promise to allow users to migrate to another host in the fediverse. https://doctorow.medium.com/https-pluralistic-net-2024-11-02... Older article : https://pluralistic.net/2023/08/06/fool-me-twice-we-dont-get...

"If the person who runs your server turns out to be imperfect in a way that you can’t endure, you can find another server, spend five minutes moving your account over, and you’re back up and running on the new server"

He's completely wrong about how easy it is to move a Mastodon account to another server.

First, your instance admins can completely wipe your account before you even have a chance to move.

Second, you can't move an account, you create a new one on another server which produces a new handle. You can move followers over using some clunky process few users would understand. It can take up to 30 days to process and may require multiple tries. In case any blockage happens between your old and new server, it gets even trickier.

Worse, your content cannot be migrated. It is forever stuck at the old server and at the whims of whoever runs it. Same for the redirect from your old account to your new account.

If the point is to have a robust network where your account, content and followers/followings are safe...Mastodon is the worst.

Re: Trying to use Bluesky without getting burned again

#515

Post by appplication »

kalleboo wrote: post #352

Going more to the topic of the article rather than platform wars: In moving to Mastodon from X a few years ago, I didn't want my content to be owned by a platform, but I also just don't have it in my to write blog posts, posting threads bit by bit works better for my brain. So my solution was to write a script that took that any thread I start with a certain hashtag in it, and threadreader-style mirror it to a basic…

This is an interesting concept, and I mean no offense, but is this just essentially a public journal/demo concept for a low data web page? I’m having a hard time imagining folks will spend any time saving/ intentionally re-visiting such a site, except for e.g. posting on here for curious folks to browse through.

Re: Trying to use Bluesky without getting burned again

#516

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

glenstein wrote: post #401
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you not understand fiduciary responsibility? If they can charge and make more money they are effectively obligated to. They would need to sell their investors against the plan that everyone uses AND propose a plan that will make more money. Reddit went through this around their IPO.

Blue Sky hasn't done an IPO.

I have never seen a more obviously telegraphed plan.

Re: Trying to use Bluesky without getting burned again

#517

Post by Amezarak »

_djo_ wrote: post #461
Amezarak wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, bluechecks were who they said they were. But just because you were who you said you were did not mean you could get a bluecheck. Bluecheck -> authentic. Authentic !> bluecheck. There was no path for most people almost all of the time to get a bluecheck, and they could be removed for arbitrary reasons having nothing to do with your identity. The "process" consisted of someone at Twitter deciding you were worthy,…

Your post said Blue ticks had nothing to do with being "verified" or "authentic." and It was a mark of social cachet, not authenticity. . That is clearly false. The blue check was an accurate signal of authenticity through verification by Twitter. What it was not was a universal verification mechanism that scaled to being able to verify everyone who used the platform. Those are two different things, and the lack of u…

And yet somehow, impersonation is no more a problem on X than it was on Twitter.

The fact is nobody paid attention to the blue check except the people who had one. The outcry was because a set of people felt elite because of their blue checks and were upset that anyone could get one. Hilary Clinton or Donald Trump or Kanye West impersonators are not an issue on the platform.

Re: Trying to use Bluesky without getting burned again

#518

Post by jeroenhd »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #116
jeroenhd wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 o…

I have my own domain, and have email set up so that any email to that domain goes to me. You'd be surprised (well, nobody here on HN would be) to know how many times I tell a business that my email is "their-business@my-domain.com", and they ask me how I got that email address, whether I work for their company, etc.

I do the same, and some companies flat-out refuse to accept email adresses with their own name in them. Samsung, notably, won't allow samsung@domain.tld for some obscure reason.

Every time I have to hand out my email over the phone, I brace for having to explain my catch-all to people. Depending on how tired/tech-illiterate the person on the other end sounds, I've started using plausible-sounding alternatives (contact@/hello@/email@) instead.

Re: Trying to use Bluesky without getting burned again

#519

Post by laurex »

madeofpalk wrote: post #441
mozarella wrote: post #340

Related : Corey Doctrow's article (again) about how he doesn't trust Bluesky enough to move there from mastodon. Especially Bluesky's promise to allow users to migrate to another host in the fediverse. https://doctorow.medium.com/https-pluralistic-net-2024-11-02... Older article : https://pluralistic.net/2023/08/06/fool-me-twice-we-dont-get...

> Bluesky lacks the one federated feature that is absolutely necessary for me to trust it: the ability to leave Bluesky and go to another host and continue to talk to the people I’ve entered into community with there. While there are many independently maintained servers that provide services to Bluesky and its users, there is only one Bluesky server. I'm not sure this is up to date, but Bluesky/AT Proto's architectu…

Recommend this deep dive article to understand some of these issues: https://dustycloud.org/blog/re-re-bluesky-decentralization/

Re: Trying to use Bluesky without getting burned again

#520

Post by louthy »

GlacierFox wrote: post #502
louthy wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, to be clear, the GP was stating that their issue is a lack of free speech. You agree that that’s your biggest issue with Bluesky too. But you’re unhappy with people expressing their personal opinions, primarily because you don’t agree with them? What version of free-speech is it that you want? I assume it’s just like all ‘free speech absolutioniats’: free speech as long as it’s your own or from people you agree w…

Who said any of this nonsense you're coming out with? Where did I say I was unhappy with people expressing their opinions? What sort of surreal strawman are you attempting to build here? My issue was, quite simply, with the predominantly ultra-left phycho's that have taken a foothold there dominating the discourse. Theres no conversations there, as expected, there's just abuse. It's like twitter but in reverse. Proba…

“ That's my biggest issue with it.”

Those are your words. They literally agree with the OP’s position on free speech. You then go on to state that you don’t like what people say, even though you are lamenting the lack of free speech. You’re a contradiction with a hyper aggressive view of others: calling others “psychos” says more about you and your small minded attitude to others than it does about the people on Bluesky.

So you don’t like what people say. Who cares? Either put up with it because you believe in free speech or stop lamenting the lack of free speech on Bluesky.

And then maybe consider how you view others. Having an opinion of people being psychos just because they don’t align with your worldview is the mindset of the extremist

Post reply on HN