Scientists move to Bluesky, transitioning away from X and Meta platforms
-
Would he better if it was Mastodon, but I suppose I shouldn't let perfect be the enemy of good, and good riddance to Twitter, indeed.
While there has been some onboarding QOL stuff for mastodon, Bluesky still has them beat on that.
The "People" segment in the explore menu is a nice start, but it's still dependent on the users picking a server that somewhat matches their interests.
-
The Fediverse experience starts with an unanswerable question: what server do you want to be on?
Most people will not have any way to answer that without knowing what the downstream impact will be. Mastodon people are working on smoothing that down, but it's still a pretty fraught question. And if half a given community ends up on one server and half on another, they get fragmented and conversations and followers fizzle out.
Bluesky wants to tell people they're not a single-node lock-in to avoid the Twitter effect, but it turns out that's their key advantage.
The only thing that will guarantee they don't end up like Twitter is if they revamp their corporate governance mechanisms, but they had to take VC money and haven't come up with a long-term revenue model, so it's not clear how they can avoid it.
The Fediverse experience starts with an unanswerable question: what server do you want to be on?
This is such a cop out and makes no sense. A "server" is basically just a website. The only reason we call them servers/instances is because they are are running the same software in the background and can communicate with each other - that's it. So we put them all under common flags such as "Mastodon" for those who use the Mastodon "template", and "Fediverse" for all the "templates" that can communicate with each other.
This is literally just a problem with marketing and communication, people hear "instances"/"servers" and they shit themselves because they can't be bothered to do a bit of research. In reality they are just different websites that can communicate with each other. You have the "shakedown.social" website, the "dads.cool" website, the "bookwyrm.social" website, and plenty of others; they are all Twitter clones (Mastodon) and they all allow you to see the content posted on the others.
-
At least Bluesky is a public benefit corporation, so they at least have to consider the public good in their decision-making and not just profit. May not be much, but it's a start.
What like OpenAI?
-
Good luck with you hotmail account... Or using Outlook... etc.
I use both Outlook and non-Outlook e-mail (the former forced by my school) and never had problems.
-
The other issue is, nobody is trying to take on Facebook. Not really anything in the FLOSS community like it.
There's a couple contenders but they're not very good. I think most FOSS people don't WANT a facebook alternative; they'd prefer to keep their IRL identity separate from the internet. And the people who don't care also don't care enough to want to go federated.
There's spacehey as a myspace alternative though. That's pretty neat but it's full of teenagers unfortunately.
-
It's a take that apparently requires a lack of reading comprehension on your part.
And absolute rudeness on yours.
I'm just a little sick of this attitude that everyone on here seems to have that everyone should be using Mastodon without consideration for the fact that it does have quite a large number of downsides. It's ridiculous not to accept that fact and not to want to improve the platform so that the downside aren't there and then people would use it.
You can't berate people for not using the product you want them to use if the product you want them to use is annoying to use
-
Cause the name is hard to remember.. I was trying to yesterday and the closest I could get is megatron
The name should have been MinBB (Mastadon is not Blue Bird).
-
That's not really a fair description of what's going on.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with a recommendation algorithm, can you imagine trying to use Netflix if it didn't tell you about any of the shows and you just have to guess and type in a film in order to see if it existed?
The problem with algorithms is when they're the only option, or when they are invisible and you think you are getting a timeline of people you've subscribed to, but really you're getting an algorithm optimizing retention. As long as it's just recommending stuff there's nothing wrong with it, in fact as a lot of people point out, it's kind of necessary.
The world functioned before recommendation algorithms. Even the internet did. Once upon a time, when Goggle worked, it didn't modify its results based on your history.
Netflix could operate fine with classifications, ratings good tagging and search. It doesn't need to monitor your viewing habits and recommend something based on them.
-
I'm just saying, because someone is a scientist absolutely does not absolve them of human fallibility. I just don't like the take of "because scientist, therefore smart or wise" and that's not true, they're just (hopefully) educated and credible in their one specific field and nothing else.
Right but Mastodon is irritating to use, isn't it? It has actual problems. I think it's intellectually dishonest to pretend that it doesn't have problems and therefore anyone not using it is being ignorant.
-
Took me like a day on bluesky to find all the funny people. Never saw any funny people on mastodon.
The comedians don't use it. Why would they, there isn't that much of an audience there. Also I don't think there's even particularly political people on it for pretty much the same reason. All of the political commentators I follow either post on bluesky or post on both platforms, somewhat eliminating the need for Masterdon at all (assuming that's the kind of content you want to follow).
-
What like OpenAI?
OpenAI was always set up in a stupid way though. It was always for profit business that owned a charity, so there was always this potential to go into the "for-profit exclusively" direction.
If you look at news articles from a few years ago even back then there were people saying that the name isn't really appropriate. GPT has never been open source at any point.
-
The other issue is, nobody is trying to take on Facebook. Not really anything in the FLOSS community like it.
Friendica aims at that. I'm not sure about the results as I haven't tried it.
-
The world functioned before recommendation algorithms. Even the internet did. Once upon a time, when Goggle worked, it didn't modify its results based on your history.
Netflix could operate fine with classifications, ratings good tagging and search. It doesn't need to monitor your viewing habits and recommend something based on them.
Yes but it would be more irritating to use than without which is my point.
The world function perfectly well without electricity but I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting that we go back to a pre-electrified age just because technically it's possible.
-
We can avoid it ever becoming shit when a wannabe dictator buys it if we make it impossible to sell: like mastodon and other federated options.
Right, that's the sure-fire way. But if a platform is better in some way than another, I'm inclined to use it, as long as it's morally just to do so.
I like Bluesky because it's more like Twitter was. But I like Mastodon because of how liberated it is. So I'll use both, probably, until Bluesky turns to shit (or doesn't).
-
What.. Are you taking about? I know hundreds of scientists and the vast majority of them interact with social media just as much as normal people.
And when is the next circle jerk about how making an account on the Fediverse is too complicated for "normal people?"
-
This post did not contain any content.
I would prefer any ActivityPub instance, but press media (and in general private entities), to which scientific institutes intend diffusion, is moving to bluesky...
-
I use linux because I hate microsoft, not because itâs more feature complete than windows (it isnât).
lol... "Feature complete" if you want terrible features.
i just want it to work without having to fix it
-
Because a fediverse is any group of technologies that talk to each other via a common protocol. In 2025 thatâs ActivityPub and has been for awhile. It would be one hell of a stretch to assert that a single platform with its own home made protocol that doesnât talk to any other technology in the entire fediverse as part of that fediverse. So at best you can say Bluesky has its own fediverse. And if one fediverse is going to be âthe fediverseâ itâs going to be the one that actually connects all the most common platforms people use today, including Diaspora.
Diaspora doesn't use ActivityPub, does it? It's still a Fediverse app though, and still fairly widely used.
It would be one hell of a stretch to assert that a single platform with its own home made protocol that doesnât talk to any other technology in the entire fediverse as part of that fediverse. So at best you can say Bluesky has its own fediverse.
I agree with this.
-
While there has been some onboarding QOL stuff for mastodon, Bluesky still has them beat on that.
The "People" segment in the explore menu is a nice start, but it's still dependent on the users picking a server that somewhat matches their interests.
thing is lot of that is on purpose. mastodon and fediverse are more of an attempt to come back to the state where there is no algorithm picking for you... but too many people nowdays are simply too lazy to search and actively choose what they want to see.
what we really need is to separate content (keep that in fediverse) and content access and presentation (the interface people use to access the content). if you want a bot feeding you content whole day and for your internet to become a tv you nobody can stop you. but if you want to think amd search nobody should stop you either
-
Using social media is far removed from operating your own publicly available social media server.
This coming from someone who is trying to get more mastodon usage in higher ed. Profs aren't the ones who operate these things. Merely getting the approval to get the project started is an immense task.
My question was about the "scientists are not allowed to" part. I've never heard to such restrictions, and been in the field for more than a decade.
