When reading any essay about the perils & merits of Bluesky's architecture, save yourself some time by searching for "Blacksky" in the post. If they don't address Blacksky, more than likely the author's understanding of the space has major gaps.<p>(Blacksky is the/one of the furthest along in building competing versions of each part of the AT proto stack.)
I know very well what it is, it doesn’t change anything in the grand scheme of things. I wish it did!
Re-reading my reply, it is worded more harshly than I intended. My apologies.<p>I do think it's a critical omission to not address the main player(s?) who are working on key parts of this, and where they may yet run into problems.
Does it require people change defaults? If so then 99% will never use it.<p>A system or protocol is whatever the easiest user journey is. Anything outside of that will never be seen by many users unless there is some value to be gained by going there. And that value has to be something gained now, not a hypothetical like insurance against future closing of the network. People don’t like to buy insurance.
I might be misunderstanding something about atproto, but isn't it always possible to export data from bluesky because all it takes is reading your data, which is done by any app interacting with your pds anyway? If they block that, they're blocking atproto functionality entirely, no?
> If they block that, they're blocking atproto functionality entirely, no?<p>Keep in mind, twitter got rid of their API. Google got rid of XMPP federation. Bluesky breaking or defederating atproto wouldn't impact most users, so they'd probably get less outcry than those examples.<p><a href="https://support.google.com/code/answer/55703?hl=en" rel="nofollow">https://support.google.com/code/answer/55703?hl=en</a>
> At every layer, the answer is "anyone can run their own." At every layer, almost nobody does.<p>But people do and it is reportedly fairly easy so the majority of people are on Bluesky's layers while all is well. But also I don't understand why any of this is a reason to be "wary", it's a great place to be with some unique technical properties - it is way more "open" than any other platform of similar scale.
Bluesky is architected so you can export your data and follows and followers to your own or someone else's infrastructure at any time. There are some groups that have taken that offer and moved off of Bluesky's infrastructure (see Blacksky). The fact that most people aren't doing that is a sign that people are happy with how Bluesky-the-company is running things. What's the issue?
Most people were happy with Twitter as well
And Bluesky is better because you're not locked in and can export your posts, follows, and followers off of their infrastructure if they start being evil or you randomly feel like it. Companies like Twitter effectively wield network effects to stop people from leaving. All of one's activity on Twitter increases the sunk cost to keep them on Twitter in a way that's not true for Bluesky.
I don't have a horse in this race, but:<p><i>> [..] machine-readable archive of information associated with your account in HTML and JSON files. [..] including your profile information, your posts, your Direct Messages, your Moments, your media ([..]), a list of your followers, a list of accounts that you are following, your address book, Lists that you’ve created, are a member of or follow, [..], and more.</i><p>(Note that I actually elided some additional things that are included in the export, for readability's sake.)<p><a href="https://help.x.com/en/managing-your-account/accessing-your-x-data" rel="nofollow">https://help.x.com/en/managing-your-account/accessing-your-x...</a>
You can't actually use your followers and following list from X on other sites. With Bluesky, you can move your profile onto other infrastructure, continue to see posts from people you follow, and make new posts that your followers still see like nothing happened. It's like how if you own your own domain name, you can set your MX records to whatever email service you want and change it when you want without affecting anyone you're having email conversations with.
Ah, I see. Your use of the term "export" made me misunderstand. Though now that I've thought about it for a few minutes, I'm not sure what verb makes sense [to me] there. I guess "migrate?"<p>edit: also, thanks for clarifying!
whether you agree or not, asking "what's the issue" misses the point very badly, since the article is almost entirely about what the issue is (i.e. that most people will not change defaults and the default is to centralise on the bluesky servers)
The fact that the system is built around this escape hatch makes it miles better than almost all other social networks. An escape hatch doesn't need to be used by most people to be valuable.
It's weird to focus on that when there isn't a single thing in software that doesn't suffer from "everyone will just use the default anyway"
It’s easy to get caught up in the excitement of a fresh social graph, especially when the migration feels so organic. However, the author makes a poignant point about the inherent tension in building a protocol while simultaneously acting as its primary, VC-backed gatekeeper.<p>The real test for the AT Protocol will be whether it can truly decouple from Bluesky PBC before the pressures of monetization or an exit strategy kick in. Right now, we’re benefiting from the "honeymoon phase" of a platform that needs growth more than revenue, but history suggests that the bridge to true decentralization needs to be fully built before that dynamic inevitably shifts.
True p2p is the only approach that will work, not federation. I'd go futher and make the protocol high-friction for federation.<p>It's true that many p2p attempts have failed, but it's also the only solution that doesn't require someone running servers for free. There's evidence of success as well: napster (and bittorrent). Both were wildly successful, and ultimately died because of legal issues. It might work when the data is yours to share.
I can't imagine a world where a p2p social network is practical. Not when each node is an unreliable mobile phone that's maybe on cellular. Even with something like ipfs you have pinning services, bittorrent has seed boxes, because pure p2p is impractical.
There doesn't seem to be a timestamp associated with this article, but it is based on outdated information.
>> You can self-host a PDS. Almost nobody does.<p>Who would've thought true decentralization means everyone hosting their own server? Yes, each user would have to pay and maintain it, but that's the cost of decentralization. ATProto at least makes it easy to jump ship if shit hits the fan and not have to start from scratch. Try doing that with Twitter/Instagram/Etc.
> That's the same argument people made about Twitter. "If it goes bad, we'll just leave." We know how that played out.<p>Yeah, it played out with my whole social circle leaving, as evidenced by the fact that all my friends link me to the bluesky post whenever there's something happening now.
There are specific steps Bluesky could take to decentralize the network. These are going to sound extreme but I agree with the article that it will never decentralize on its own. (Nothing will ever decentralize on its own so this isn't a criticism of Bluesky specifically.)<p>1. Strongly encourage backups.<p>2. Force users to migrate off the "official" PDS until it has less than, say, 40% market share.<p>3. Make the mobile apps use third-party relay/appview by default (could be randomized).
Bluesky's behavior here isn't surprising.<p>They already ban signups using email aliases, and apparently block alias emails to their unban support address too.
Pangram labs thinks this post is fully AI generated, for what it's worth. <a href="https://www.pangram.com/history/47460dd9-f9cc-45a8-81dd-dc59bfc18047/?ucc=xWMW3bihWzf" rel="nofollow">https://www.pangram.com/history/47460dd9-f9cc-45a8-81dd-dc59...</a>
It is not, but I have used Claude to edit it.
This app flags "'s infrastructure" as a hallmark of AI-generated prose. Other markers of AI generation include "'s not just", "making it", "'t just" (33x more likely in AI!), and "ecosystem".<p>I don't think it's trustworthy.
Pangram itself looks like it was just generated by Google AI Studio.
Pangram seems like a useful service for the world we are going to face. To me the semicolon-newline pair reminds of AI almost immediately. I am surprised that this service didn’t point that out. It could be just to me this pattern is bothering though.<p>> His answer:
"Where X actually lives" is a new hallmark of AI writing. I've noticed it a lot lately.
"That's the same argument people made about Twitter. 'If it goes bad, we'll just leave.' We know how that played out."<p>Yeah, I left.<p>(And in fact I am wary of all social media.)
I've never looked at the AT Protocol before. It seems like you could have achieved most of that with existing DNS, HTTP and RSS implementations. All they really needed was some file formats and some well known URL schems and all of this could have been far easier to implement and deploy.
It's good FUD. You re-iterate their talking points. (Also, no CTA, no takeaway, just <i>"worry!"</i>)<p>As others have said, the data has to be publishable to be useful. We do have data export laws. The format is known to be ready to use interoperably, not some private schema--atop the PBC commitment, which will at least have moderate legal costs if not a guarantee. It has unequivocally set a new high bar.<p>They seem pretty locked in to doing what they committed to. The day may come when they turn. It may come first by friction, but the turn has to be pretty complete, because the data is pretty open. What's needed to view it, use it at all, is pretty close to what's needed to host it.<p>"The site whose value prop is sharing your posts and data with other apps may stop sharing your posts and data with other apps." <i>Yeah, it's possible. It's also possible they just close.</i>
For more atproto, see their recently redesigned homepage <a href="https://atproto.com/blog/new-site-2026" rel="nofollow">https://atproto.com/blog/new-site-2026</a>
> If an acquirer disables exports, it doesn't matter that the tools existed yesterday.<p>Don't they have to give you your data upon request? And the cheapest way is to offer an export function? Wasn't this thanks to the EU (GDPR Article 20)?
They can give it to you in the least useful way imaginable and will. What we want and expect is an export that can be easily imported to some other provider and that's where the "good guys" can differentiate.<p>I can export decades of web browsing history, bookmarks, logins, etc. and import into any other browser with almost no trouble at all. Try to export your mainstream social network (facebook, twitter, insta, tiktok, etc.) content and connections and import it into another social network and let me know how that goes.
Also, at best this says not to host your data on someone else's computer and keep control of it, which is a thing Bluesky explicitly supports and encourages.<p>Will normal people do it, no. But you can.
(Throwaway account.)<p>Several people have mentioned that "you can just own your own data, so that's enough, right?"<p>Interoperating with Bluesky requires you to either 1) opt into the did:plc standard, which is a centrally controlled certificate transparency log, or 2) have all your users create did:web accounts by manually setting DNS records.<p>So it is not possible to build on Bluesky at all without opting into this centrally controlled layer. This original post covers this, but maybe not in enough detail to stop commenters from missing the point.<p>Bluesky the company controls 95%+ of PDSes in the system, which control users' private keys, and they're extending PDSes to include more functionality that prevents users from easily exiting the network, e.g. private data is being implemented in a way where Bluesky LLC can see all your activity. The protocol changes often and with limited community input.<p>This is being done because "there are no other ways to do it" and "our users are okay with it". The community does pretty consistently attack people who dissent (e.g. look at what happened when Mastodon leaders objected). There's a lot of cheerleading for people who do opt into the system, and there's really no incentive for informed criticisms.<p>It's not really decentralized or neutral infrastructure; it's a great network for a number of specific subcultures who have a nice space away from X, and I hope the team embraces that.
Good points, but what's the alternative at this point?<p>Because of network effects, more users is generally more interesting. Blue Sky has "enough" at this point for me to be happy there. Programmers like antirez, my bike racing people like inrng, my city's mayor and one of our city councilors, and also a bunch of urbanists.<p>Edit: you lose some connections moving around, but I've also had friends I've known since the days of IRC. I think I'm mostly resigned to picking whatever works best in the moment and being willing to move (like abandoning Twitter) when it's not working.
<a href="https://indieweb.org/POSSE" rel="nofollow">https://indieweb.org/POSSE</a><p>which is not opposed to you being on Bluesky or Instagram or LinkedIn or wherever.
Nostr - it has none of the problems mentioned in the article.
Isn't Mastodon an alternative?
Go outside
If anything gets too popular too quickly, I just assume it's a PsyOp.
That kind of growth requires extensive media coordination and big money. If you're not paying for a product, then you are the product. As sure as gravity.
Bluesky isn't my bank records, isn't my photo archive, isn't my github, isn't my Documents folder.<p>I don't care if Bluesky goes away, gets bought, whatever.<p>Social media is disposable like a retail outlet. I'm sad if the coffee shop around the corner goes out of business, but there are 99K coffee shops in the US. I can go to another one.<p>As it is, I don't use Meta or X.. because they're led by despicable beings. Bluesky gets a pass for now, and has enough interesting people that I show up and have a chat. Like a coffee shop or a bar.
This never-ending whining about oooh but my data ... for a service that you can use for free is nauseating.<p>This is a for-profit company running this service. It ain't free to operate.<p>If you don't like that, go elsewhere.<p>If there is one thing that has been a resounding success on the internet it is this: free services that you pay for with your clicks.
Just look at the plethora of free services you get.<p>In no other economy would that be even remotely possible.