Bluesky now has 30 million users.

[nima@leminal.space]

Nice. Glad to see people leaving xitter en mass.

[lost_my_mind@lemmy.world]

Arbitration of what? It's a free service. What money could they possibly owe you?

[drspod@lemmy.ml]

Another corporate social media platform, what could go wrong?

[semi_hemi_demigod@lemmy.world]

If the mods or admin do something that causes you injury, such as ignoring requests that will prevent harassment.

[lost_my_mind@lemmy.world]

......how would them ignoring requests cause injury??? We're still talking about bluedky, right? The online twitter clone without musk as it's main selling point?

[tyfud@lemmy.world]

If someone was doxxing you on bluesky, for example, and in the doxxing, you got attacked/injured by someone who recognized you/went to your house.

[underpantsweevil@lemmy.world]

Love an app that defaults me to people I actually follow and doesn't bombard me with endless reams of ads or engagement bait.

We'll see how long that lasts. But for now, its a blast from the past to be on a social media app I don't hate.

[mrkawfee@lemmy.world]

I can't wait for them to bring in ex CIA/IDF types to "clamp down on disinformation".

[internetcitizen2@lemmy.world]

Off topic, but I pointing this out reminded me of visiting some ancap circles to see the crazy stuff they discuss. At one point there was a question about how externalities would be handled in their system of private courts and such. When ever I do read some terms and conditions there is almost always something in regard to arbitration. Predictably they were not happy about someone pointing that out and explaining that it is for the benefit of corporations not the customers.

[skygirl@lemmy.world]

I never trust meta statistics anymore because you know they're filling out their "numbers" with bots to try and keep their stock prices up.

[rivalarrival@lemmy.today]

During signup, they make it sound like it's a federated service. It is not. Dumped it when it was explained to me.

[unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de]

They can break data protection laws and stuff...

[pls@lemmy.plaureano.nohost.me]

I find it odd that people follow Jack Dorsey into another sewer in troves. They seem to like the previous Twitter experiment, while I find it repugnant.

The lesson today is that I don't get the social media phenomenon. My bad. I hope they have a ton of fun.

[ulrich@feddit.org]

Unfortunately that's standard for pretty much every service in existence until the government determines otherwise or the users demand it en masse. No company is going to willingly expose themselves to any more risk than they absolutely have to. There's zero benefit to them.

[ramenshaman@lemmy.world]

30 million users and still nobody likes my posts

[lost_my_mind@lemmy.world]

Ok......and why would they pay YOU that money? Wouldn't it be companies and governments they pay?

[spooser@lemmy.today]

Then the person liable to you would be the person doxxing you, not Bluesky themselves unless Bluesky themselves was the party that doxxed you and in that case I don't think a court would hold you to the arbitration.

[lost_my_mind@lemmy.world]

That is an ass pull if I've ever heard one.

Let me make sure I understand your comment correctly.

You're saying that if you post information publically, on a platform whose whole concept is that everything is public, and someone uses information you posted there to identify you, stalk you, break and enter, and then assault you.......that it's the fault of the service you used to post that identifying information?

That's the arguement being made?

[lauchs@lemmy.world]

Tried it last night for a hockey game. I still think I'm not using it correctly but people were nice.

[tabular@lemmy.world]

Let's not call disabling the right to sue a "business risk". That's like calling the right to stop paying for the service a "risk" - it's riskdiculous.