Great ATProto blog post on the reasoning behind their design architecture
-
By “Fediverse” people usually refer to “ActivityPub”-based social networks such as Mastodon and Lemmy.
People also rightfully argue that Bluesky, despite the best of intentions, is not decentralised. See How decentralized is Bluesky really? (long read).
-
The literal first line of Wikipedia agrees with me?
The Fediverse (commonly shortened to fedi)[4][5][6] is a collection of social networking services that can communicate with each other (formally known as federation) using a common protocol.
I believe you're quoting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fediverse
It seems that document currently expresses that "the AT Protocol, which powers the Bluesky social network" is "[a] major protocol in competition with the Fediverse", which suggests that neither "the AT Protocol" nor "Bluesky" are included in the Fediverse.
Moreover, "AT Protocol" and "Bluesky" are conspicuously absent from the second paragraph of the article content / lead section.
The majority of Fediverse platforms are based on free and open-source software, and create connections between servers using the ActivityPub protocol. Some software still supports older federation protocols as well, such as OStatus, the Diaspora protocol and Zot. Diaspora* is the only actively developed software project classified under the original definition of Fediverse that does not support ActivityPub.
There discussion related to this around https://thebrainbin.org/m/[email protected]/t/705694/-/comment/5682529
-
This post did not contain any content.
This is interesting, but I don't yet entirely understand it.
My first thought after trying to read the entire document was that the author seems to suggest that "AT Protocol" is a natural result of the movements they describe, but I find it hard to believe that the "peer-to-peer (p2p) movement" could naturally result in things that "are not meaningfully decentralized, and are not federated".
-
This post did not contain any content.
I know all you guys comment about fediverse(activityPub) is not bsky(atprotocol) but can we enjoy this stupid quote for a moment?
However, if the internet is functioning properly and you have a computer, an internet connection, and an IP address you can host a document on the web.
That statement is so redundant.
"internet functioning properly" = "an internet connection"
and you cant have an internet connection without an ip adress. On Lan you may have the option to let the device decide BUT it still needs one!I dont think the entire article is bad or something but let me have my nitpickings.
- its too long, and with that i mean half the thing is 3 concepts that could have been explained shorter
- too many fancy words (i am not a native & my reading comprehension gets worse at all those extravagant marketing words, so thats my error)
- not including the one picture of the protocoll/network topology. I needed to keep that in my brain to not get confused Masto Post with Topology
- that one paragraph at the post start but can happen to anyone so its simply hilarious
-
I believe you're quoting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fediverse
It seems that document currently expresses that "the AT Protocol, which powers the Bluesky social network" is "[a] major protocol in competition with the Fediverse", which suggests that neither "the AT Protocol" nor "Bluesky" are included in the Fediverse.
Moreover, "AT Protocol" and "Bluesky" are conspicuously absent from the second paragraph of the article content / lead section.
The majority of Fediverse platforms are based on free and open-source software, and create connections between servers using the ActivityPub protocol. Some software still supports older federation protocols as well, such as OStatus, the Diaspora protocol and Zot. Diaspora* is the only actively developed software project classified under the original definition of Fediverse that does not support ActivityPub.
There discussion related to this around https://thebrainbin.org/m/[email protected]/t/705694/-/comment/5682529
Yeah I think we've been having on off discussions about ATProto's place in the Fediverse here for probably 2ish years in multiple threads.
Looks like today the crowd has finally more sternly come to a decision lol. I think there were threads last year here around this ATProto with a lot better nuance and discussion, but Bluesky has been getting a lot of hate and misinformation thrown at it from this pocket of the internet lately, which is somewhat disappointing since they both the pocket should operate symbiotically.
Possibly a sign of newer Lemmy users though which is good regardless.
-
This is interesting, but I don't yet entirely understand it.
My first thought after trying to read the entire document was that the author seems to suggest that "AT Protocol" is a natural result of the movements they describe, but I find it hard to believe that the "peer-to-peer (p2p) movement" could naturally result in things that "are not meaningfully decentralized, and are not federated".
I think they meant mostly the decentralised distribution of data.
At the end of "Generic hosting, Centralised product development" it saysEven though product development is centralized, the underlying data and identity remain open and universally accessible as a result of building on atproto. Put another way, ownership is clear for the evolution of a given application, but since the data is open, it can be reused, remixed, or extended by anyone else in the network.
So theoretically everyone can access the data but before it reaches the end users it goes through centralised applications like bsky -
I know all you guys comment about fediverse(activityPub) is not bsky(atprotocol) but can we enjoy this stupid quote for a moment?
However, if the internet is functioning properly and you have a computer, an internet connection, and an IP address you can host a document on the web.
That statement is so redundant.
"internet functioning properly" = "an internet connection"
and you cant have an internet connection without an ip adress. On Lan you may have the option to let the device decide BUT it still needs one!I dont think the entire article is bad or something but let me have my nitpickings.
- its too long, and with that i mean half the thing is 3 concepts that could have been explained shorter
- too many fancy words (i am not a native & my reading comprehension gets worse at all those extravagant marketing words, so thats my error)
- not including the one picture of the protocoll/network topology. I needed to keep that in my brain to not get confused Masto Post with Topology
- that one paragraph at the post start but can happen to anyone so its simply hilarious
not including the one picture of the protocoll/network topology
This is a solid one from their wiki
-
Because it's not functional without BSky servers and BSky also retains control of moderation.
After reading the article i think you might be wrong with this one.
From what i got now is that there are 3 layers
First is storage which can be completly or is decentralised
Then backend/server/application layer which can be bsky or whatever ticktok alternative gets made which is not decentralised
and then user layer/view which depends on the application
What i want to say is that the relay can be exchanged through something else
So pro atProto is:
- data seems to be actually decentralised
- applications sharing the data
- everyone gets the data
And pro ActivityPub is:
- more alternatives of the same application/server
- way better control over data (federation & defederation)
- servers interact with each other nativly (atPr seems to let the servers only interact with data)
- more efficient (servers can update clients, in case of at least bsky clients have to ask servers)
pro ActivityPub? (unsure about the technical details)
- moderation? As in shared lists
- able to host by individuals? As in i dont need an compute intensive relay
-
not including the one picture of the protocoll/network topology
This is a solid one from their wiki
-
The "Fediverse" (capital F) refers to the social media platforms utilizing ActivityPub, specifically. I don't believe there's any agreed-upon name for such a network on ATProto, since Bluesky is the only platform actively using it.
I don’t believe there’s any agreed-upon name for such a network on ATProto
They use the term 'Atmosphere' which is, admittedly, a really good play on words.
-
After reading the article i think you might be wrong with this one.
From what i got now is that there are 3 layers
First is storage which can be completly or is decentralised
Then backend/server/application layer which can be bsky or whatever ticktok alternative gets made which is not decentralised
and then user layer/view which depends on the application
What i want to say is that the relay can be exchanged through something else
So pro atProto is:
- data seems to be actually decentralised
- applications sharing the data
- everyone gets the data
And pro ActivityPub is:
- more alternatives of the same application/server
- way better control over data (federation & defederation)
- servers interact with each other nativly (atPr seems to let the servers only interact with data)
- more efficient (servers can update clients, in case of at least bsky clients have to ask servers)
pro ActivityPub? (unsure about the technical details)
- moderation? As in shared lists
- able to host by individuals? As in i dont need an compute intensive relay
But what about the DIDs, the things used to actually identify accounts within the ATproto ecosystem:
But Bluesky has developed its own DID method, did:plc. Today, did:plc stands for "Public Ledger of Credentials", however it originally stood for "Placeholder DIDs", with the hope of replacing them with something else later. The way that did:plc works is that Bluesky hosts a web service from which one can register, retrieve, and rotate keys (and other associated DID document information). However, this ledger is centrally controlled by Bluesky.
-
The Fediverse is a specific thing. And even if it were just referring to any federated social network, it's very questionable whether Bluesky really can have independent instances.
The ATProto equivalent of "Fediverse" is Atmosphere.
-
I think they meant mostly the decentralised distribution of data.
At the end of "Generic hosting, Centralised product development" it saysEven though product development is centralized, the underlying data and identity remain open and universally accessible as a result of building on atproto. Put another way, ownership is clear for the evolution of a given application, but since the data is open, it can be reused, remixed, or extended by anyone else in the network.
So theoretically everyone can access the data but before it reaches the end users it goes through centralised applications like bskyI'm not sure that your reply is directly related to my comment. The full sentence I quoted is "Under these definitions, Bluesky and ATProto are not meaningfully decentralized, and are not federated either." by Christine Lemmer-Webber, but Daniel Holmgren talked more directly about "decentralised distribution of data".
Because of what I quoted, I don't think that "Bluesky" or "ATProto" are decentralized or federated, so it's extremely unlikely that I'll interact with them anytime soon. The particular reason that they are not decentralized or federated is not really interesting to me.
To get specific: it is a significant issue for me if "everyone can access the data but before it reaches the end users it goes through centralised applications". A "centralised application" is able to restrict my ability to contact other people, whereas with a federated and/or decentralized/distributed system, it's more likely that I will be able to contact someone that I want to communicate with. For comparison, consider how people would feel if using the United States Postal Service meant that all physical mail had to pass through the District of Columbia or if sending an email message required interacting with
BBN-TENEXAjust because that was the first machine to be capable of sending networked electronic mail. In the ideal case, the recipient of a message I send would not have to coordinate with me at all before they receive the message: "The first use of network email announced its own existence." -
But what about the DIDs, the things used to actually identify accounts within the ATproto ecosystem:
But Bluesky has developed its own DID method, did:plc. Today, did:plc stands for "Public Ledger of Credentials", however it originally stood for "Placeholder DIDs", with the hope of replacing them with something else later. The way that did:plc works is that Bluesky hosts a web service from which one can register, retrieve, and rotate keys (and other associated DID document information). However, this ledger is centrally controlled by Bluesky.
-
Instead of being a patronizing ass, how about let's have some discussion about
The ultimate goal of this subreddit is a fully decentralized social media landscape.
And how ATProto is not accomplishing this / what they can be doing differently than what's outlined in their blog post
Or a counter argument to
Fracturing discussion between ActivityPub and ATProto helps no one, especially in niche communities like this.
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it’s related services using ActivityPub
-
This post did not contain any content.
A few days ago I posted the same question on X, Bsky and Mastodon. I've received more interactions and responses on Mastodon than the other two combined.
-
A few days ago I posted the same question on X, Bsky and Mastodon. I've received more interactions and responses on Mastodon than the other two combined.
Its nice yeah. Feels like more real people
-
I'm not sure that your reply is directly related to my comment. The full sentence I quoted is "Under these definitions, Bluesky and ATProto are not meaningfully decentralized, and are not federated either." by Christine Lemmer-Webber, but Daniel Holmgren talked more directly about "decentralised distribution of data".
Because of what I quoted, I don't think that "Bluesky" or "ATProto" are decentralized or federated, so it's extremely unlikely that I'll interact with them anytime soon. The particular reason that they are not decentralized or federated is not really interesting to me.
To get specific: it is a significant issue for me if "everyone can access the data but before it reaches the end users it goes through centralised applications". A "centralised application" is able to restrict my ability to contact other people, whereas with a federated and/or decentralized/distributed system, it's more likely that I will be able to contact someone that I want to communicate with. For comparison, consider how people would feel if using the United States Postal Service meant that all physical mail had to pass through the District of Columbia or if sending an email message required interacting with
BBN-TENEXAjust because that was the first machine to be capable of sending networked electronic mail. In the ideal case, the recipient of a message I send would not have to coordinate with me at all before they receive the message: "The first use of network email announced its own existence."my original point was more that atProto maybe was inspired by the "decentralized distribution of data" that p2p has
In my brain i somehow got the idea that anyone could theoretically access the data without going through bsky and trying to write my guess down i somehow got spun up on that paragraph
sorry if i got you wrong again
-
Yep. You can even go right into the source code and find out if it is truly decentralized. And right now, ActivityHub is and ATProto inst. Maybe at some point it will be (which I hope will happen regardless of bluesky) but at the moment, it is not.
Both have some P2P components but one of the big ones:
"The answer, if you guessed it, is centralization. All direct messages, no matter what your Personal Data Store is, no matter what your relay is, go through Bluesky, the company." which you can see more clearly starting here: https://github.com/bluesky-social/atproto/blob/01f2bd13eb62a0aef43bfdad7594dd69f58bc9f5/packages/pds/src/pipethrough.ts#L94
-
They support did:web too if you don't like did:plc
