I’m still a user but prefer Mastadon and Lemmy from a user and engagement perspective
Avoid Bluesky.
“When asked if Bluesky would always be free of advertisers like it is today, Graber said: “I don’t think that’s necessarily true.”” —https://techcrunch.com/2024/12/05/bluesky-ceo-jay-graber-is-reshaping-social-media-but-advertising-isnt-off-the-table/
It’s fine right now still, but given it’s a centralized, corporate-run platform at the end of the day, I’m skeptical of its long-term prospects; what’s stopping the guys in charge of that platform from going turncoat and turning it fully into Twitter 2.0?
Mastodon by contrast of being an open, decentralized platform, has some immunity against the enshittification that will inevitably ruin any centralized platform.
It is Twitter 2.0 The question his will he sell it out like Twitter 1.0 ?
You mean when. When is the question.
I always assumed that was the plan. “We sold twitter for so much $! Let’s do that again!”
the legion of shills all but disappeared about 3 months in. i guess their budget ran out. but at least we stopped getting the anti-fedi pro-bluesky spam here at the fediverse so i don’t care anymore if its alive or not. mastodon is the only social media i use today not counting aggregation portals like lemmy.
It never had a chance. There’s no way to make profit selling ads and user data and have it be decentralized. They are conflicting goals.
I’m not saying there aren’t other ways to make a profit on a decentralized platform, but they never said they had any other business model, so we had to assume that the traditional one was it, and we were right.
Bluesky isnt decentralized
VC financed social media at the start of its enshittification journey. Started interesting with open protocol but seems it has no ambitions of being open.
Deleted my account 6 months ago and haven’t missed it.
It’s just twitter 2.0, may as well be closed source, and it’s a joke to call it decentralized. I’m only on there because the community I keep up with is mostly on there, but the site is literally unusable without the blocklist feature, which of its own is incredibly easy to abuse. It was far better when it was almost entirely a leftist space, before the big twitter exodus of liberals.
Mastodon’s looking far better on the casual usability front lately so maybe folks will start moving over there soon.
It’s not compatible at all. And bots acting as bridges isn’t compatibility.
As for self hosting an instance that is federated with the official Bluesky instance, you will only be able to do that in your dreams. You can self host your own PDS though.
Bluesky is the most centralized decentralized platform
I’m not saying I’m very knowledgeable but as your asking for the consensus. I think Bluesky is much better than twitter but it doesn’t properly embody the ideals of the fediverse: that is a decentralized network of instances but it really only has one main instance. It’s also heavily viewed as an alternative to twitter, people who like twitter but don’t like X or the way elon musk is running things so the same people who don’t like twitter go to X and therefore the community isn’t so much better.
But who am I to say this I don’t even use twitter mastadon or Bluesky.
Works fine. Most of the artists I followed from twitter moved there. and its quite a nice place.
certainly more hospitable than the nazi platform, that’s for sure.
As far as I know Bluesky protocol is open-source but not its main app. Also, there are several apps available to use Mastodon. Additionally, note that Bluesky uses the AT Protocol (developed by Bluesky) while Mastodon uses ActivityPub (W3C standard) which is more friendly for third-party devs.
As far as federation is concerned it’s still mostly centralized with Bluesky while Mastodon is fully federated.
Something I personaly like as well with Mastodon is that the feeds don’t use algorithms.
Mastodon builds on the ActivityPub protocol with its own API, but the last time I looked into it, the documentation of the API was poor, so it was difficult to develop for.
I haven’t looked at the BlueSky docs so I can’t compare, but it sticks in my craw a bit seeing the words “friendly for third-party devs” being used in the same sentence with Mastodon
Not being a developer myself, the wording may not be the best sorry. The take home message was that Mastodon seems more prone to external development based on its protocol and the fact that more than 20 apps already exist (all platforms included).
Outside of using several apps to use Mastodon, I personaly rely on its API only to add Mastodon posts as comments on my static blog.
The ecosystem is not so healthy on the server side, and I think the API documentation is a major factor.
The project has been sitting on this for many yearsYou could say it’s an improvement over BlueSky because with Mastodon you can host your own server, but if you don’t like their server, then you’re out of options
It’s still for profit, not federated and
closed sourceso honestly I don’t know why it’s being discussed hereclosed source
Bluesky is open source.
I don’t know why it’s being discussed here
It is being discussed to see if things have changed.
My bad, I’m not an expert here but it’s weird that it’s open source and yet nobody else can have a bluesky? Like could I download that code and make a bluesky for everyone? If so why has nobody else done it? why is there only one for profit bluesky?
To answer your question though, no nothing has changed.
Free Our Feeds is trying to make this happen
But if it’s open source what is stopping them from simply creating another bluesky like yesterday?
From what I can tell, Bluesky is much more demanding in terms of the technical challenge of doing this on your own, and part of the issue is that some of the key tools to make this easier don’t really exist yet, making it much harder than setting up a Mastodon instance for example, so part of what they want to do is bridge that gap as well as stand up more independent servers.
It turned out to be a Twitter clone from ten years ago and I realized I didn’t need that any more. If I didn’t need to reach some people who cannot overcome the hurdle the fediverse proper puts up before being enjoyable, I would not be using it today. But media popularity post-Elon-Twitter and relative ease of setup have given the platform relative heft. But it’s not open and not really federated so it’s masquerading and we don’t really want you know whose money is paying the bills behind the scenes either. If anything, the fediverse can learn from Bluesky a thing or two about onboarding people who cannot be asked to invest the time to make Mastodon enjoyable. It will take time, much more time, to get people, especially non-techy ones, to the new normal of being your own algorithm. I see Bluesky as a stepping stone in that direction that will survive in its own niche.
On the same note, how is the interoperability between threads and the Fediverse nowadays?
I don’t have Threads or follow anyone from there but sounds a bit… complicated?
Thanks for the link, this is the kind of info I was wondering about.
Zero, I hope
I remember I blocked threads back then when they started connecting it.
Mrs. Erinaceus loves it, after fleeing Xwitter and being disappointed with Mastodon. However, in this Wired article/interview (which I read some time ago and might not remember all that well), Bluesky’s CEO comes across as being, well, a CEO. Judge for yourself: Bluesky Is Plotting a Total Takeover of the Social Internet.
Jay Graber’s background before BlueSky is in Web3 so take that information how you will.
I want her to exploit my means of production so bad, if you know what I mean.
Yeah, I know, I had to keep myself from writing something along those lines as part of my initial comment. Hopefully Mrs. E won’t see this, as she has a somewhat fiery temperament and is quick with the rolling pin…
