how decentralized is bluesky really?
I keep this link around for this question and curious about others thoughts. I’m basically fine with fediverse alternatives nowadays, I never post much anyways. I’m fine with not joining bluesky and just sticking to activitypub and remain skeptical about AT proto. People much smarter than me that actually build things in this space seem to be skeptical too.
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.
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
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.
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.
First let’s kill X, that’s reason enough to use it for now. At least you’re still supporting more open protocols
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.
I’m still a user but prefer Mastadon and Lemmy from a user and engagement perspective
used it for a bit but just got bored so deleted my profile.
