Do I remember correctly that there was some conversation around #Bluesky considering a native #ActivityPub support?
-
I don't know why they don't just buy the Bluesky bridge, make some use of all that crypto cash.
-
Well, for now I'm just subscribing to https://github.com/bluesky-social/atproto/discussions/1716.
-
@stefan what would be the benefit to bluesky to buying bridgy fed? not sure what you feel theyd get out of that
-
@laurenshof
wouldn't that basically mean just hiring Ryan?
@stefan -
@laurenshof Right, which is why they won't. I mean, it would be a really nice thing to do, to bring the social web together.
The tool already exists, seems to be working well enough, and I'm sure its developer would be happy to not to have to support it indefinitely. If the tables were somehow reversed, people here would jump on the opportunity, I think.
-
@laurenshof To me this just shows that they're not interested in connecting people as much as taking over a market.
And that's fine, I guess. But really off-putting.
-
@osma @laurenshof Right. Maybe he'd even be able to open to handing it off, or selling it to Bluesky?
-
@stefan
Bridgy does more than Bluesky to Fedi, and some of those other uses probably wouldn't benefit from Bluesky acquiring it (as a service). However the code probably could easily form a "native" (and bsky-hosted) link from Bluesky to fedi.
Disclaimer: I haven't actually looked, and know no more than as a user.
@laurenshof -
Stefan Bohacekreplied to Osma A last edited by [email protected]
@osma Right, fair enough.
But I'm sure if the Bluesky folks were interested, they could work something out together, maybe incorporate relevant parts into their codebase.
But as @laurenshof said, what would they get out of that.
-
@stefan Well other question: what would the rest of the ecosystem get out of it? I wasnt expecting people see it as potentially beneficial for bluesky to own the primary bridging infrastructure tbh, wouldve expected you to see that as a negative
-
@laurenshof You're right. I didn't really consider that this bridge handles more than just Bluesky, so disregard that.
It's just frustrating that they had to split the social web instead of trying to help fix whatever inadequacies ActivityPub has with their millions of dollars in funding.
-
I think they will cut it off eventually. Making noises about "the inherent risks involved in not knowing the provenance of users on their network".
-
@diego @laurenshof Oh really? That's interesting.
-
@stefan @laurenshof
the supposed inadequacy was about account portability, which is quite laughable considering we have only one organization running a relay
https://atproto.com/guides/faq#why-not-use-activity-pub -
@luca @laurenshof Right. Most people really just don't care all that much about this. I think many took the wrong lesson out of Twitter's collapse.
-
Purple :verified:replied to Stefan Bohacek last edited by
Honestly, I feel like this is unlikely to happen in the future, not because they don't want to (ok also because they don't want to), but because it would go against their business model.
Implementing ActivityPub would cost money, potentially users and adds to the required moderation efforts. It's a net-loss for them unfortunately
-
Stefan Bohacekreplied to Purple :verified: last edited by
@Purple Yeah, I think you summed it up right.
