this post was submitted on 19 May 2025
20 points (83.3% liked)

🦋 Bluesky Social

314 readers
82 users here now

Bluesky is a federated social network built on ATProtocol.

Rules:

  1. Follow lemm.ee's site-wide rules.
  2. All posts must, in some way, relate to Bluesky or ATProto.
  3. Do not make duplicate posts.
  4. Do not post x.com links.

Useful Links:

News, discussion, and memes are all allowed here.

See also:

founded 4 months ago
MODERATORS
airportline@lemm.ee
Emperor@feddit.uk
emperor@lemm.ee
20
Bluesky Is Plotting a Total Takeover of the Social Internet (www.wired.com)
submitted 15 hours ago by airportline@lemm.ee to c/bluesky@lemm.ee
21 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Character_Locked@lemm.ee 1 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

The feddit.org interpretation of that law is debated

Sure but that doesn't change that they interpreted it the way they did and now they're enforcing that interpretation. Theoretically any instance could do whatever they want but in reality this instance did the thing that everyone worries about centralised platforms doing.

I get that you can leave links to your old profile and communities, you can also do that on forum sites and any other platform when you switch. I still don't see any difference or benefit here. As an end user that just wants a place to shit post and isn't trying to run a server or write code or whatever, the experience is the same, whether I'm trying different Lemmy instances or different centralised platforms. And it'll be the same until I can take my online presence and all of its history, pack my bags and go elsewhere with it. Not sure how that would work though, I'm just spitballing here.

Anyway, I think this is probably a conversation that I'm gonna avoid and ignore in future here though. I get the sense that the only place to discuss certain aspects of the Fediverse without people getting angry or taking things personally is somewhere outside of the Fediverse. Because people are weird and defensive about it and make it part of their personality, which I think is the reason for at least 50% of the hate towards Bluesky.

[–] Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

Sure but that doesn’t change that they interpreted it the way they did and now they’re enforcing that interpretation. Theoretically any instance could do whatever they want but in reality this instance did the thing that everyone worries about centralised platforms doing.

Indeed, but the main difference between a centralized platform and a decentralized one is how easy it is for users to change communities.

If Reddit bans a subreddit, users cannot create any alternative subreddit on the whole platform.

In the feddit.org case, other users have set up !europe@lemmy.dbzer0.com , which everyone can use instead of !europe@feddit.org without having to create a new account.

I still don’t see any difference or benefit here.

See above.

I get the sense that the only place to discuss certain aspects of the Fediverse without people getting angry or taking things personally is somewhere outside of the Fediverse.

You could create a Fediverse-critic community here, and establish rules who would shape the community that way. There was a !linuxsucks@lemmy.world community that was active for a while.

Because people are weird and defensive about it and make it part of their personality, which I think is the reason for at least 50% of the hate towards Bluesky.

People have seen Reddit and Twitter enshittify because of their centralised model. A decentralized model is considered a solution to this.

I think Bluesky would get less criticism here if they were honest about the fact that they aren't really going for a decentralized model instead of pretending they are, but then it costs millions to run an independent node would require a whole company

The likely answer to this is that there will always have to be a large corporation at the heart of Bluesky/ATProto, and the network will have to rely on that corporation to do the work of abuse mitigation, particularly in terms of illegal content and spam. This may be a good enough solution for Bluesky’s purposes, but on the economics alone it’s going to be a centralized system that relies on trusting centralized authorities.

https://dustycloud.org/blog/how-decentralized-is-bluesky/

[–] timconspicuous@lemmy.ml 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

You mention the costs of running a relay as mentioned in the Christine Lemmer-Webber piece, but since that piece was written, Bluesky made a significant update to how relays work, making them much cheaper to operate. Bryan Newbold made a blog post about how he managed to run a relay for $34 a month. Dozens of people run such full-network relays now! Christine Lemmer-Webber herself even first assumed those were not pulling the full network, but later corrected herself!

It remains to be seen how well all of that will scale if the network continues to grow, but can we please please move away from completely exaggerated claims like "it costs millions to run an independent node"?

[–] Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 9 hours ago

Oh, very interesting!

Seems like the blog post and Christine's updates are quite new, maybe they deserve their own post here in the community?

[–] Character_Locked@lemm.ee 1 points 10 hours ago

You could create a Fediverse-critic community here

I wouldn't go that far lol. It's just interesting watching how people vote on certain posts and opinions. I'll most likely still speak my mind regardless, it'll just be one of those things that I know will be 'controversial' around here every time lol.