Asklemmy

44152 readers

2043 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

124

What's wrong with bluesky? (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 3 weeks ago by Stomata@sh.itjust.works to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

148 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Seriously i have zero idea what is going on with bluesky. I never used it. Why are people saying it's centralised? I also heard that a lot of people are joining it.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 57 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

Depends on your perspective. Would it be fine for Meta Threads to replace it? Threads supports ActivityPub, so in some ways it likely interacts better with the fediverse.

If we agree that Threads isn’t a suitable replacement, then clearly there’s some criteria a replacement should meet. A lot of the things that make Threads unpalatable are also true of Bluesky, particularly if your concern relates to the platform being under the control of a corporation.

On the other hand, from the perspective of “Twitter 2.0 is now a toxic, alt-right cesspool where productive conversations can’t be had,” then both Threads and Bluesky are huge improvements.

[–] prex@aussie.zone 14 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Plus is gets the idea into people's heads that you aren't married to a platform.

[–] Klear@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago

I wish, but I wager most people will immediately get married to Bluesky.

[–] prex@aussie.zone 4 points 3 weeks ago

Plus is gets the idea into people's heads that you aren't married to a platform.

[–] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 weeks ago

Supporting ActivityPub doesn't excuse being owned and operated by META.

Will Bsky eventually shit itself like Twitter did? Sure, maybe. That seems to be the normal path nowadays. And when it does, I've still got my Masto account that I try to keep active as well. But at the very least, Bsky is a different company. I can have a bsky account without being dragged into an entire META ecosystem designed to put their chosen content in front of my eyes.

Even at it's worst, the fact that Bsky is it's own thing and not owned by a mega corporation puts it automatically about Threads, regardless of ActivityPub.

[–] monk@lemmy.unboiled.info 1 points 2 weeks ago

If it needs a server to talk to others, that's already bad. If it needs a server, but it can be my server, it's palatable. That's all the criteria you need.