this post was submitted on 24 Mar 2025
6 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

69098 readers
4321 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I thought this was slightly funny.

Mark Zuckerberg is known these days for wearing t-shirts with Latin phrases on them, especially ones where he compares himself to Julius Caesar.

Bluesky made a shirt in the same style, but theirs says "a world without Caesars" in Latin.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 0 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] cabbage@piefed.social 0 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

As much as I hate to be that guy, it's worth keeping in mind that BlueSky is not really practising what they preach here. The AT protocol formally allows for a kind of decentralization, but it is prohibitively expensive to run an instance, meaning that only rich folks or those who are willing to accept money from venture capitalists will be capable of actually doing so.

ActivityPub already existed when they started BlueSky. They chose to not make their protocol compatible. The reason is simple: They are a company, and they have a profit motive. ActivityPub is too democratic, and therefore hard to monetize. By now they have a bunch of crypto bro investors who want their money back. It's better to leave your money elsewhere.

[–] FlowVoid@lemmy.world 0 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (1 children)

only rich folks or those who are willing to accept money from venture capitalists

Or non-profits that are willing to accept money from supporters.

ActivityPub already existed when they started BlueSky. They chose to not make their protocol compatible.

Because AT protocol has features that are incompatible with ActivityPub, and those features are important to some users.

[–] cabbage@piefed.social 0 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (1 children)

Or non-profits that are willing to accept money from supporters.

The fact that we don't see this yet, and that Bluesky has accepted the amount of money they have from actors I would not want to be associated with, makes me doubt this is possible.

Even if a non-profit wanted to operate with good intentions, the expense of running an AT proto hub would eventually prove a challenge, and the non-profit would either go under or need to start looking around for money. Meanwhile people can self-host their Mastodon instance on a Raspberry Pi.

Regarding the alleged missing features of ActivityPub, I have tried and failed to understand exactly which feature is the AT proto folks so desperately wanted that they found it impossible to achieve through ActivityPub. The whole thing with having a mobile identity or whatever seems like a nothing burger to me - at the end of the day it just means that your user name is your DID number, and that web addresses can redirect towards that one. It's hardly some technological marvel that could never have been achieved on a less centralized protocol.

[–] baronvonj@lemmy.world 0 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

It's hardly some technological marvel that could never have been achieved on a less centralized protocol

My one complaint about fediverse is I have half a dozen baronvonj@ accounts in order to get the features and UI experience of each. They are all separate, with the data for each spread out, and we all have to redundantly follow on each. If I could have one fediverse identity with all my data self-hosted, that would be the awesomesauce. But I can't with fedi and I can with AT.

[–] cabbage@piefed.social 0 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (1 children)

I guess that's fair, as a way to make users identifiable with the same user name all over the internet, no matter which platform they are on.

When people sign in using bluesky on https://frontpage.fyi/, they are still bluesky accounts? Or does the account somehow transform into something that exists between both sites?

Is there any real innovation here beyond a combination of "sign in with x service" and having your domain appear as your user name?

[–] baronvonj@lemmy.world 0 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm not sure if it's good window dressing on top of SAML/OAUTH but I see the same username on both. Not this is not me, I just scrolled frontpage.fyi and picked a poster at random then searched the same username on bsky.app.

https://bsky.app/profile/tonybark.com https://frontpage.fyi/profile/tonybark.com

[–] cabbage@piefed.social 0 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Yeah, they will use their domains, and they can sign in with Bluesky. So it is the same account to a pretty significant degree. What I'm wondering is if the Frontpage user would break if Bsky.app disappeared, or if the user could still sign in as the identity is somehow truly decentralized.

As for domains as user names, I guess ActivityPub could achieve something by allowing users to have verified websites (mastodon style) appear as their user names. I don't really see what would have to change on a protocol level to make this possible.

[–] Sl00k@programming.dev 0 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Identity is decentralized through the protocol so they'd be fine. Bluesky at the end of the day is just app view that sits on top of the protocol so it can disappear and everything will continue operating as long as there's a relay online.

[–] cabbage@piefed.social 0 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

But on frontpage.fyi, if you want to sign up, you have to sign up through Bluesky. They direct you to bsky.app to create your account.

I just don't see how this is a real functional example of a portable account. Maybe it is not supposed to be - if so, is the decentralized nature of accounts demonstrated anywhere in a practical way?

I struggle to understand things I cannot see.

[–] Sl00k@programming.dev 2 points 2 weeks ago

I know this convo was 2 weeks ago, but they published a great article that includes how Identify is handled that answers our questions.

https://atproto.com/articles/atproto-ethos

Effectively identify is as the PDS level. So if Bluesky goes down and your account were through Bluesky you'd lose your identity ?*

If your account is held through another platform like Spark or your own self hosted PDS your identity would remain live.

*My question that sparked from this is if Bluesky went down and you're already logged into a second platform, when you log into that second platform does it duplicate your DID? I'm assuming not and you'd still lose it because logins are through OIDC and the keys still exist on Bluesky.

Regardless the true path to decentralization should be everyone hosting their own identity on their own PDS w/ identity but that might be a longshot. The path to decentralization is effectively allowed but will people take advantage of it?