cross-posted from: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/17686207

It’s a very long post, but a lot of it is a detailed discussion of terminology in the appendix – no need to read that unless you’re into definitional struggles.

  • atro_city@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    I think, possibly like many others, since BlueSky came from the creator of Twitter, I do not trust it. At the moment, I don’t even think there’s anything anybody can say about it that would make me want to even test it. It just feels tainted.

    Also, what is BlueSky promising? A new Twitter? The fediverse is making so much more possible: new Twitter(s), new Youtube, new Instagram, new Reddit, and it’s even being put into Wordpress, maybe even Tumblr, and who knows what else. How does BlueSky fit into that puzzle?

    • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      2 months ago

      I don’t trust it because there’s no believable plan to make it commercially viable, so it’s just going to end up defunct or enshittified. Mastodon is up front, it’s a volunteer service that you can either pay for or roll the dice on the instance staying up. And there’s a built-in way to move on when one goes down.

      BlueSky is a B-corp, which theoretically means they can say their mission takes priority if sued by an investor in court, but doesn’t in any way require them to make it the primary goal, and the reality of funding and money and investors means that’s almost certainly not going to happen.

    • The Nexus of Privacy@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Dorsey’s not involved in Bluesky any more but I agree that there are lots of reasons not to trust them (including Dorsey’s original involvement).

      Bluesky’s currently a much better Twitter alternative than Mastodon but I totally agree, there’s a lot more to social networking than that. I talk about ways I see Bulesky as complementary to the ActivityPub section in the last section, “It’s the end of the Fediverse as we know it – and I feel fine”

      • OhYeah@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        Can I ask why you say Mastodon isn’t a good twitter alternative and maybe what it could do to improve? Sorry if I missed that part in the article

        • The Nexus of Privacy@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          You didn’t miss it, I didn’t go into detail on it in the article … one big reason is that because of how ActivityPub works you only see a fragment of the overall conversation (instead of everything). If you’re on a big well-connected instance like mastodon.social you see more of it but still not all; if you’re on a smaller not-so-well-connected instance you miss most of it. This comes in conversations (the “missing replies” problem), with search, and with hashtags.

          Another reason is that Twitter’s got a lot of journalists, activists and organizers, politicians, government agencies, athletes, etc … and Mastodon for the most part doesn’t. That’s not a technical issue, but for most people, following one or more of those groups is something they’re used to from Twitter, so Mastodon doesn’t fill the same role.

          Again, there’s plenty of stuff Mastodon is good at! And Twitter clones replicate Twitter’s problems as well as what people like about it. But for people who are sick of Twitter and want a similar experience elsewhere (as opposed to trying something different), they’re more likely to get what they want on Bluesky (and in many cases even Threads, especially if they already have an Instagram account and don’t want to see political stuff) than Mastodon.