Skip to main content


Social Media Feed reshared this.

in reply to Hank G ☑️

@osnews and I are definitely on the Fedi side. Threads and BlueSky are traps.
in reply to Thom :linux: :a_openbsd:

The people behind both, financially and otherwise, are the exact same people that gave us the calamity of modern social media and tried the exact same market monopoly move with web3/crypto (which I despise for other reasons but that’s a segue). They even sold the latter with the same decentralization and egalitarianism marketing shtick. I’ll be damned if I trust my social media presence to them again. To quote The Wire: “Fuck me once, shame on you. Fuck me twice, shame on me.”
in reply to Hank G ☑️

They’re paying for the PR and marketing, so they get the press. I don’t think BlueSky offers any real alternative to the other walled-garden products out there, and unlike the Fediverse products they’re under investor pressure to create a profit. I give them three years.
in reply to Brad Koehn ☑️

In MSM yes but that I don’t think that explains Mike Masnick or Casey Newton coverage of it. It was reading Casey’s newsletter this morning that pushed me over the tipping point of putting my thoughts on the matter down in a post.
in reply to Brad Koehn ☑️

…I do wish that on the AP side we could move to DIDs or some other more portable identifier system like what they have in BlueSky and Solid. The domain locking is one of the biggest problems with AP but we don’t know how the UX of that will work in practice over on BlueSky with AT yet either when people try to migrate accounts. I also wish we had a fraction of the capital coming in in a way that isn’t going to drive us to the same data selling/algorithm juicing place the rest of them go. I’m not smart enough to have an answer to that conundrum :(
in reply to Hank G ☑️

If it helps you feel better, I never heard of Bluesky until I saw your post!
in reply to Hank G ☑️

yep I think it is the age-old issue of there is no financial force driving PR etc for pure open source and decentralised projects. VC funds want to ensure their investments succeed, and I think they also help drive their own projects...
in reply to Hank G ☑️

All valid points above... but I want to chime in a thought not touched. All VC Tech Bros launch platforms and services driven by a 5 year exit plan. Their goals have nothing to do with creating something good or sustainable. Their goals have to do with creating something with valuation in mind so they make a killing handing it off to someone else, i.e. Twitter and more. They don't care about anything else.
in reply to Hank G ☑️

AP has significant problems, for certain. I’d love to see any improvement, but none appears to be happening. As standards-based messaging protocols go, email remains the champion. It was developed outside a profit motive, with simple, well-defined protocols for c2s and s2s, and largely unimpeachable by third parties (“don’t fix email” is an axiom for a reason).

My guess is that rather than improvements to AP, we’ll see a new, ground-up replacement for it that addresses its many shortcomings.

in reply to Brad Koehn ☑️

I’d rather they build on AT or Solid than do it yet again. Hell I’d even give Nostr a look as a protocol even though it is yet another Silicon Valley techbro (Jack Dorsey) concoction
in reply to Hank G ☑️

Nostr is an abomination and its users deserve the hell they have created. IMHO.
in reply to Brad Koehn ☑️

You couldn’t pay me to join the actual Nostr network but I’m thinking there may be lessons about the protocol that could be built on. I think they are doing something like the DID thing too. So maybe I’m just saying do something with DIDs lol.