Re: How decentralized is Bluesky really?

so 30. 11. 2024 v 17:30 odesílatel Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
napsal:

> I know a number of us overlap with interests in the social web tech
> community. Christine Webber, a long-time CCG member and the lead
> editor and author of the W3C ActivityPub standard[1], which is the
> basis for a number of Fediverse social networking services such as
> Mastodon and Threads, has written an interesting piece about
> decentralization and BlueSky:
>
> https://dustycloud.org/blog/how-decentralized-is-bluesky/
>
> Of particular interest to this community is what Christine says around
> DIDs and what might be required to make them decentralized beyond what
> BlueSky is doing. There are a number of other interesting observations
> around the various definitions of "decentralization", DNS, petname
> systems, account portability, object capabilities, and scaling
> characteristics of decentralized protocols that are of interest to
> this community as well. It's a good prelude to some work that is
> currently going in the community and what is to come in 2025.
>
> It's a long read, but a good one, and is filled with thought provoking
> observations, as we've come to expect from Christine.
>

A thought-provoking topic! While the title is certainly attention-grabbing,
I’d say decentralization is more of a spectrum than a binary state—nothing
is entirely centralized or decentralized. These terms often get caught up
in "either/or" thinking and have become buzzwords, thanks to the success of
systems like Bitcoin, which achieved decentralization through fair issuance
and a level playing field for money.

FWIW, I wouldn’t categorize Bluesky or DIDs as particularly decentralized.
Both came into existence via fairly centralized consensus processes. For
example, the DID method registry has a centralized aspect, full of
Bitcoin-like systems but with different monetary policies that sometimes
benefit a select few. It’s a registry that can also be gamed with enough
resources.

Bluesky, as I recall, started as a research initiative and evolved into a
spec and an app—perhaps catalyzed by feedback that they lacked either at
the time. Bluesky’s approach to decentralization—letting third parties
manage private keys—might seem counterintuitive to decentralization
enthusiasts, but it’s proven effective for scaling. Their growth, far
outpacing nostr, suggests this approach resonates with users. It’s a
practical compromise, even if it’s not the "pure decentralization" ideal.
I’d say their focus on a credible exit is worth acknowledging, as it aligns
with user priorities.

I still hold out hope for systems that are truly decentralized—perhaps we
need a term like “credibly decentralized” to differentiate. It’s tough when
there are no penalties for co-opting these terms for marketing while users
reward convenience over strict adherence to principles. Solid, for
instance, offers interesting potential in this space, enabling users to
write what they want with minimal constraints, though it, too, faces
challenges like DNS reliance. Resource-oriented approaches or pkarr could
help here.

In the end, I think it’s about packaging tools in ways that meet users
where they are while adhering to credible decentralization principles.
Bluesky’s growth shows the power of pragmatic choices, and I hope their
credible exit succeeds. It’s a journey we’re all on, and there’s much to
learn from everyone’s attempts.


>
> -- manu
>
> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/activitypub/
>
> --
> Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/
> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> https://www.digitalbazaar.com/
>
>

Received on Sunday, 1 December 2024 08:26:37 UTC