We're coming to the point where decentralized social media contains the only structures we're going to have left that aren't completely controlled by hard-right interests

[m@lgbtqia.space]

@rwg @cwebber

algorithms are already decentralized in bluesky

it would be no biggie to build a client that is not in the US and that can use arbitrary algorithmic feeds

[octaviaconamore@cutie.city]

@m @rwg @cwebber isn't the cost of running a bluesky relay prohibitively expensive?

[m@lgbtqia.space]

@OctaviaConAmore @rwg @cwebber

The algorithmic feeds are a separate thing from the "relay".

There are ways to bring the cost of a "relay" down dramatically and it also would be possible to distribute such a thing in a system with centralized trust... maybe even decentralized trust.

In fact you could build a BlueSky entirely without this "relay" since all data is available over the PDSs and all data is public.

meaning you could build a client that scrapes PDSs and has nothing in between.

And then again, if the US fucks up that badly i am okay with paying 10EUR a year to a German company to host a "relay".

(there is a problem with PLC servers but i think one could overcome them)

In the end the entity that controls the PDSs controls what data is available.

As more ppl host their own PDSs the potential influence of BlueSky company shrinks.

Think of it in terms of a lot of git repos with all posts, likes, blocks etc. of a user on it; and a relay is just a big indexer, search engine and quick database to look all this data up. (there are a few nuances but they can be overcome IMHO like the PLC)

[mastodonmigration@mastodon.online]

@cwebber

The only small quibble with this is that it is not clear that Bluesky is not currently already owned by hard right interests. And after this next Bain Capital funding round resulting in a $700M valuation, it is a veritable certainty.

See "Who actually owns Bluesky?": https://mastodon.online/@mastodonmigration/113801236486095587

#Bluesky

[2something@transfem.social]

@[email protected] ArXiV and Wikipedia are also centralized "hold-outs."

Which is why we can expect Republicans to try to ban them or take them over soon.

[puppygirlhornypost2@transfem.social]

@2something @[email protected] to be honest i am not sure if they are centralized hold outs. The problem with just saying "Wikipedia" is that while it's true the English Wikipedia is a hold out, there's already some issues with other wikis under that umbrella. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/admin_tools%27_abuse_in_French_Wikipedia

[puppygirlhornypost2@transfem.social]

@2something @[email protected] wikipedia is always in turmoil and comes to these sort of "centrist" compromises that fuck over marginalized groups.

[jdp23@blahaj.zone]

@[email protected] Bluesky's going to be a target no matter how decentralized they are as long as they're a competitor to social networks run by the government and their cronies. There are important ways in which a decentralized approach makes the ecosystem more resilient against attacks but there are also other ways where decentralization makes things more vulnerable -- for example the way CSAM on a couple of (widely-blocked) Japanese instances was used to paint Mastodon as a whole as filled with CSAM, or the way so much regulation has costly compliance requirements that big companies can afford but smaller networks or nodes run by individuals can't. So, it's tricky all around.

In general I think of it in terms of three tiers:

- white supremacist / anti-trans / etc networks - Xitter, Meta, Truth Social ...

- "neutral" networks, like Bluesky is trying to be.

- actively anti-racist, pro-LGBTQIA2S+ (etc) networks. Parts of today's fedi are trying to be like this (although most of it is in the "neutral" category, and there are also parts that are pro-LGBTQIA2S+ but kinda racist). In general though this is an underserved market.

[blake@infosec.town]

@drwho @cwebber I put a lot of trust in the founder and other developers. I don't trust their board.

edit: by founder I mean Jay, not the Twitter guy

[timbray@cosocial.ca]

@m @OctaviaConAmore @rwg @cwebber

> There are ways to bring the cost of a "relay" down dramatically and it also would be possible to distribute such a thing in a system with centralized trust... maybe even decentralized trust.

I am not convinced that this is true. Fortunately, anyone can easily prove me wrong by building what you describe and showing that it provides useful service at scale.

[mastodonmigration@mastodon.online]

@blake @drwho @cwebber

This is the key point. Jay Graber seems very sincere, but her ability to control things is limited by her relative equity position. It is not known what percentage ownership she has, but in typical VC backed enterprises it would be far short of control. Also, the fact is that should someone with a whole lot of money want to buy Bluesky, she stands to become a very very wealthy person. Such prospects are a severe test of one's principles.

[m@lgbtqia.space]

@timbray @OctaviaConAmore @rwg @cwebber

Sure. My rates are 180€ per hour.

[timbray@cosocial.ca]

@m @OctaviaConAmore @rwg @cwebber If you can do that kind of thing, your rate is too low. (Not joking.)