Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters
1–10 of 471 posts
Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters
#2Personal Data Server (PDS) github link: https://github.com/bluesky-social/pds
Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters
#3Does 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.
Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters
#4I think they nailed every Mastodon criticism that I've heard floating around and addressed it, however I'm especially curious to learn about the moderation layer in-depth.
Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters
#5Hey 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 help: https://discord.com/invite/UWS6FFdhMe
Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters
#6Does 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.
Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters
#7This seems like what Berners-Lee’s Solid project is trying to do, at least in principle. Is that correct?
Seems intriguing regardless. Congrats on making it happen!
Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters
#8I hope someone comes up with a multi-protocol social server. Bridges are a bad architecture for decentralized systems, because they introduce single points of failure. I can understand using a read-only bridge to mirror content from external resources, but if the other side speaks a federation protocol you should find a way to communicate directly so you don't have to worry about intermediary failures.
Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters
#9This looks pretty compelling! The best of controlling your own data and a global, network-effects-compatible content approach. Seems like a win for users if it gets adopted.
Re: Bluesky announces data federation for self hosters
#10Does 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.
Nothing against Bluesky, but I think we are all a little jaded after seeing decades of the "embrace, extend, extinguish" pattern.