Bluesky made more money selling T-shirts mocking Mark Zuckerberg in one day than it has in two years of selling custom domains
-
Well, most people don't read Latin, so there's a high risk of ending up looking exactly as pretentious as the asshole one seeks to make fun of.
That's a fair point. If you're concerned about people judging you, you probably wouldn't want to be seen as a Fuckerburg fanboy.
-
only rich folks or those who are willing to accept money from venture capitalists
Or non-profits that are willing to accept money from supporters.
ActivityPub already existed when they started BlueSky. They chose to not make their protocol compatible.
Because AT protocol has features that are incompatible with ActivityPub, and those features are important to some users.
Which benefits does AT have in comparison to Activity pub? Except currently single point of entry/failure?
-
What does this mean? Am I old?
Its actually a pretty well aged reference, of legal drinking age in the US.
-
If Brutus ain't around, we can count on Luigi
-
Which benefits does AT have in comparison to Activity pub? Except currently single point of entry/failure?
- The real user names (DIDs) are cryptic codes that are kept hidden most of the time, with your visible user name redirecting towards it. This gives the illusion that user names can be changed/transported, and that users are not locked down to one platform.
- Content is filtered rather than censored, so that a big monopolistic actor can allow bigots on their platform but keep them out of sight of regular users. Had Bluesky been an ActivityPub hub, it could easily end up being perceived as a nazi bar. This is a benefit for Bluesky who do not want to be responsible for moderating their platform.
They want decentralized moderation on a centralized platform. That's how on Bluesky, there's an understanding that the removal of hate speech "conflicts with Bluesky’s decentralized goals". On Mastodon, the decentralized nature is how we can give bigots the boots without them getting to whine about their freedom of expression. Bluesky manages to create a problem using the very same concept by which Mastodon solves it.
I guess this didn't really end up being a post about the benefits of AT. Oops.
-
I thought this was slightly funny.
Mark Zuckerberg is known these days for wearing t-shirts with Latin phrases on them, especially ones where he compares himself to Julius Caesar.
Bluesky made a shirt in the same style, but theirs says "a world without Caesars" in Latin.
-
Or non-profits that are willing to accept money from supporters.
The fact that we don't see this yet, and that Bluesky has accepted the amount of money they have from actors I would not want to be associated with, makes me doubt this is possible.
Even if a non-profit wanted to operate with good intentions, the expense of running an AT proto hub would eventually prove a challenge, and the non-profit would either go under or need to start looking around for money. Meanwhile people can self-host their Mastodon instance on a Raspberry Pi.
Regarding the alleged missing features of ActivityPub, I have tried and failed to understand exactly which feature is the AT proto so desperately want that they found it impossible to achieve through ActivityPub. The whole thing with having a mobile identity or whatever seems like a nothing burger to me - at the end of the day it just means that your user name is your DID number, and that web addresses can redirect towards that one. It's hardly some technological marvel that could never have been achieved on a less centralized protocol.
Regarding the alleged missing features of ActivityPub
There are significant differences in account portability. ActivityPub allows you to transfer your followers to a new server, but not your content.
-
I thought this was slightly funny.
Mark Zuckerberg is known these days for wearing t-shirts with Latin phrases on them, especially ones where he compares himself to Julius Caesar.
Bluesky made a shirt in the same style, but theirs says "a world without Caesars" in Latin.
-
Or non-profits that are willing to accept money from supporters.
The fact that we don't see this yet, and that Bluesky has accepted the amount of money they have from actors I would not want to be associated with, makes me doubt this is possible.
Even if a non-profit wanted to operate with good intentions, the expense of running an AT proto hub would eventually prove a challenge, and the non-profit would either go under or need to start looking around for money. Meanwhile people can self-host their Mastodon instance on a Raspberry Pi.
Regarding the alleged missing features of ActivityPub, I have tried and failed to understand exactly which feature is the AT proto so desperately want that they found it impossible to achieve through ActivityPub. The whole thing with having a mobile identity or whatever seems like a nothing burger to me - at the end of the day it just means that your user name is your DID number, and that web addresses can redirect towards that one. It's hardly some technological marvel that could never have been achieved on a less centralized protocol.
It's hardly some technological marvel that could never have been achieved on a less centralized protocol
My one complaint about fediverse is I have half a dozen baronvonj@<service> accounts in order to get the features and UI experience of each. They are all separate, with the data for each spread out, and we all have to redundantly follow on each. If I could have one fediverse identity with all my data self-hosted, that would be the awesomesauce. But I can't with fedi and I can with AT.
-
Regarding the alleged missing features of ActivityPub
There are significant differences in account portability. ActivityPub allows you to transfer your followers to a new server, but not your content.
Nothing in ActivityPub says you can't move your content from one platform to another. It's just that Mastodon does not have this feature at the moment.
Meanwhile, I'm not sure whether Bluesky has this feature or not, but it's somewhat irrelevant considering the fact that there are no other platforms to move your content to. The only thing I've actually seen from this is that you can use an URL as your username in the front-end, though it just points towards the same DID in the backend. I struggle to see what the great achievement here is.
If this was the reasoning behind Bluesky, they could have developed a platform running on AP supporting the transfer of content between instances, and it would have been a whole lot easier than developing a whole new protocol.
-
I thought this was slightly funny.
Mark Zuckerberg is known these days for wearing t-shirts with Latin phrases on them, especially ones where he compares himself to Julius Caesar.
Bluesky made a shirt in the same style, but theirs says "a world without Caesars" in Latin.
Hmm, yes, ads bad but that IS a good product
-
I thought this was slightly funny.
Mark Zuckerberg is known these days for wearing t-shirts with Latin phrases on them, especially ones where he compares himself to Julius Caesar.
Bluesky made a shirt in the same style, but theirs says "a world without Caesars" in Latin.
Every little bit helps.
-
"The king is dead, long live the king".
Or: Same shit, different wrapping.
This for-profit social platform will be different guys!
-
It's hardly some technological marvel that could never have been achieved on a less centralized protocol
My one complaint about fediverse is I have half a dozen baronvonj@<service> accounts in order to get the features and UI experience of each. They are all separate, with the data for each spread out, and we all have to redundantly follow on each. If I could have one fediverse identity with all my data self-hosted, that would be the awesomesauce. But I can't with fedi and I can with AT.
I guess that's fair, as a way to make users identifiable with the same user name all over the internet, no matter which platform they are on.
When people sign in using bluesky on https://frontpage.fyi/, they are still bluesky accounts? Or does the account somehow transform into something that exists between both sites?
Is there any real innovation here beyond a combination of "sign in with x service" and having your domain appear as your user name?
-
Nothing in ActivityPub says you can't move your content from one platform to another. It's just that Mastodon does not have this feature at the moment.
Meanwhile, I'm not sure whether Bluesky has this feature or not, but it's somewhat irrelevant considering the fact that there are no other platforms to move your content to. The only thing I've actually seen from this is that you can use an URL as your username in the front-end, though it just points towards the same DID in the backend. I struggle to see what the great achievement here is.
If this was the reasoning behind Bluesky, they could have developed a platform running on AP supporting the transfer of content between instances, and it would have been a whole lot easier than developing a whole new protocol.
Nothing in ActivityPub says you can't move your content from one platform to another.
Your content in ActivityPub is linked to the home instance. So for example I can't move this post from lemmy.world to another server. I could copy/paste the content into a new post on another server, but it would be a broken piece of our conversation with no context or replies.
Also, hosting a ATProto self-instance is not as expensive as you suggest. This person did it for $150/month.
-
As much as I hate to be that guy, it's worth keeping in mind that BlueSky is not really practising what they preach here. The AT protocol formally allows for a kind of decentralization, but it is prohibitively expensive to run an instance, meaning that only rich folks or those who are willing to accept money from venture capitalists will be capable of actually doing so.
ActivityPub already existed when they started BlueSky. They chose to not make their protocol compatible. The reason is simple: They are a company, and they have a profit motive. ActivityPub is too democratic, and therefore hard to monetize. By now they have a bunch of crypto bro investors who want their money back. It's better to leave your money elsewhere.
ActivityPub already existed when they started BlueSky. They chose to not make their protocol compatible.
Traditionally, that's what new major version numbers are for. IF (and I stress the "if" because I have no clue about protocol design) it turns out that AT has useful features, a merger of ideas of both ActivityPub and AT could lead to ActivityPub 2.0.
That would be somewhat similar to AMD's proprietary Mantle leading to Vulkan (which was originally intended to launch as OpenGL 5.0).
-
- The real user names (DIDs) are cryptic codes that are kept hidden most of the time, with your visible user name redirecting towards it. This gives the illusion that user names can be changed/transported, and that users are not locked down to one platform.
- Content is filtered rather than censored, so that a big monopolistic actor can allow bigots on their platform but keep them out of sight of regular users. Had Bluesky been an ActivityPub hub, it could easily end up being perceived as a nazi bar. This is a benefit for Bluesky who do not want to be responsible for moderating their platform.
They want decentralized moderation on a centralized platform. That's how on Bluesky, there's an understanding that the removal of hate speech "conflicts with Bluesky’s decentralized goals". On Mastodon, the decentralized nature is how we can give bigots the boots without them getting to whine about their freedom of expression. Bluesky manages to create a problem using the very same concept by which Mastodon solves it.
I guess this didn't really end up being a post about the benefits of AT. Oops.
This is a benefit for Bluesky who do not want to be responsible for moderating their platform.
At least in Germany there is a mandatory German filter list that seems to be maintained by Bluesky themselves. They couldn't legally operate here if they allowed holocaust denial and such.
-
Nothing in ActivityPub says you can't move your content from one platform to another.
Your content in ActivityPub is linked to the home instance. So for example I can't move this post from lemmy.world to another server. I could copy/paste the content into a new post on another server, but it would be a broken piece of our conversation with no context or replies.
Also, hosting a ATProto self-instance is not as expensive as you suggest. This person did it for $150/month.
Fair - you could host a copy or a link (or a sort of combination between the two, I guess), but it wouldn't transfer the ownership of the original post. I'm still not sure this is such a pressing feature that I accept it as the actual raison d'etre of AT proto, especially considering how it very much exists there only in theory at best. But it is interesting technology, and something they could maybe have worked with ActivityPub to try to achieve.
I'm glad to hear that maybe Bluesky is more decentralized than I suspect, but Bluesky engineer whose blog post you linked still links to his bluesky account on bsky.social. If running a separate instance is achievable, I would love to see people actually do it.
-
As much as I hate to be that guy, it's worth keeping in mind that BlueSky is not really practising what they preach here. The AT protocol formally allows for a kind of decentralization, but it is prohibitively expensive to run an instance, meaning that only rich folks or those who are willing to accept money from venture capitalists will be capable of actually doing so.
ActivityPub already existed when they started BlueSky. They chose to not make their protocol compatible. The reason is simple: They are a company, and they have a profit motive. ActivityPub is too democratic, and therefore hard to monetize. By now they have a bunch of crypto bro investors who want their money back. It's better to leave your money elsewhere.
I obviously support ActivityPub or I wouldn’t be posting this here but one of the AtProtocol developers bought a Raspberry Pi with 8GB ram and added an NVME drive. He’s trying to prove (or possibly make) this point wrong.
https://bsky.app/profile/why.bsky.teamSo far, it seems like it’s “working” but he’s found some things that are way too slow and needs to be fixed for it to run on a Raspberry Pi. But that gives me some confidence that the developers, at least, aren’t trying to make it so only people with deep pockets can run an instance. (I don’t know what the investors want but the developers aren’t scheming assholes.)
It’s probably going to ultimately be a situation where anyone with a high end PC (by today’s standards) can run their own instance. It’s definitely not an A.I. situation where you have to reopen Three Mile Island and piss away more water than Nestle to self-host.
-
This is a benefit for Bluesky who do not want to be responsible for moderating their platform.
At least in Germany there is a mandatory German filter list that seems to be maintained by Bluesky themselves. They couldn't legally operate here if they allowed holocaust denial and such.
There are minimum standards they'll have to abide by, but that's similar to Meta after their change of policy. It really is not enough that it should make anyone feel comfortable.
Basically big platforms can choose between making moderation expensive, minimal, or arbitrary. Bluesky is leaning into minimal, keeping the door open for most things as long as they're legal. Reddit is leaning into arbitrary, having AI banning folks on account of upvotes. Facebook used to dabble with expensive, but have made a recent shift into minimal.
