Re: How decentralized is Bluesky really?

Nicely said, Golda. At the Global Acceptance Network (GAN), we are using the term “appropriately decentralized” because, as you said, some aggregation/search/reputation services need some degree of centralization. The other term Brian Behlendorf uses is “minimum viable centralization”.

From: Golda Velez <gvelez17@gmail.com>
Date: Monday, December 2, 2024 at 3:28 PM
To: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Cc: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, W3C Credentials CG <public-credentials@w3.org>
Subject: Re: How decentralized is Bluesky really?
well - fwiw, my 2c is that there are informationally fundamental needs for aggregation - like in risk, where seeing the graph just gives you predictions you can't get with the view of a single user.  So trusted nodes that users choose to share data with and receive some kind of aggregation service from, really just can't go away.  So given that heterogeneous system of 'heavy' services and light clients is needed, and also desireable for convenience, to me the goal of decentralization is to make it easy for clients to switch services - and this is where Bluesky put a lot of thought and effort.  Its not the elimination of centralized services that counts but the ability to switch and choose between them, and ways to bake that capability in.

On Sun, Dec 1, 2024 at 1:29 AM Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com<mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com>> wrote:


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