Scientists move to Bluesky, transitioning away from X and Meta platforms
-
Not required to join the fediverse, only to host your own community yourself, which is NOT what scientists need to do (unless they want to).
-
It doesn't make any sense for the University or specific professors to officially host a fediverse community, it is the wrong system of governance and community ownership here. Something like a student club or independent association of professors and students should host fediverse communities that then become unofficially associated with the University and the University should be hands off unless something really egregious happens.
-
3rd party moderation tools already exists, using the same API as the official moderation system, available to subscribe to even directly in the official app. If you don't want bluesky's moderation decisions enforced, you can run a different client which don't apply the bluesky labels (or if the bluesky appview blocks something entirely, you can circumvent that and retrieve it directly from that user's PDS)
is specifically not clarified to leave open the possibility for monetization such as forcing as on users
What
The network is specifically designed around portability and content addressing so they can't lock you in
it would never be a useful alternative to the Official Bubble maintained by the Bluesky corporation that you must submit to or be left out in the cold interacting with users only on alternate, small personal networks.
There are already plenty of people running their own self hosted PDS servers to host their account, talking to the rest of the bluesky users, using 3rd party moderation filters and 3rd party clients, with 3rd party feed generators to view stuff like topic specific feeds
Also there's bridgy so you can talk across Mastodon / bluesky by letting bridgy mirror posts and replies between the two networks
-
Bluesky is a public benefit corporation. That's very different from for profit
-
It has investors, those investors are going to want money.
-
Is the appview part of Bluesky open source? If so why not? How does that not make saying "Bluesky is open source" an inaccurate statement, or at least an incomplete statement? Can somebody reasonably run their own relay while handling a realistic amount of data from interactions?
Also there’s bridgy so you can talk across Mastodon / bluesky by letting bridgy mirror posts and replies between the two networks
A bridge is something you build and maintain, requiring constant maintenance, that joins a place that is connected with a place that is not.
-
Equity ownership is not public. Why would he sell?
-
https://bsky.app/profile/jay.bsky.team/post/3krxdfy6koc22
He never had ownership. Not all investments provide ownership.
-
Sure, but the openness of the protocols, especially the portability of accounts, makes it hard for them to push negative changes on users.
-
https://github.com/bluesky-social/atproto/tree/main/packages/bsky
The old design was built to scale to a few million users. The new backend is revised to handle ~hundreds of millions. They'll releasing bits and pieces at a time.
-
It still needs polish, but the biggest deficit is lack of adoption.
Platforms like Twitter encourage casual breaks between public and private space, but Facebook-like platforms are better for passively extending existing friendship circles. Or so it seems to me.
-
I mean, I hate BlueSky too, but I think the reason it's more popular than Mastodon is that it's more centralized and in practical terms that means it's easier to adopt and engage with.
The biggest headache I have with Mastodon (and Lemmy, to a lesser extent) is defederation. I understand it's the most practical thing to do sometimes, but it's waaay overdone. Like, there needs to be a culture of only defederating as a last resort due to pratical concerns (e.g. bots I guess). Unfortunately the current culture is one where many instance admins treat defederation as a personal blocklist. I wish more admins would leave it to individual users to decide who to allow or not.
-
Thanks. I'm now about 80% convinced he has no influence.
-
They planned ahead to make it popular, twitter developed it while losing money, my conspiracy theory is their goal was always to transition to bluesky since its model is more sustainable for long term control
-
What's blocking Mastodon's posts to be discoverable?
-
That is also true to Bluesky, and to a lesser extent, even for the Lemmy-Reddit divide. I've seen people leaving the alternative platforms for the mainstream ones, because the alternative ones "didn't made them stay as long". For me, being less addictive was part of the reason why I prefer the alt platforms, although with reddit, I had to browse through a lot of garbage already, long before the API drama.
-
Because Bluesky keeps to what made Twitter popular in the first place. The UX. You make a post and its syndicated to a federated feed that anyone can search for, and you can tag content using hashtags.
It's a great concept. There's a reason a lot of people use it.
-
What we need are good algorithms
