Re: Bluesky CEO in The Verge on how they are better than what ActivityPub can do

út 9. 5. 2023 v 12:33 odesílatel evan <anarchogeek@gmail.com> napsal:

> Hi folks,
>
> I've been around forever, but only recently got back on this list. I hope
> people don't mind me reposting something I wrote yesterday about this very
> topic.
>
> So Fiatjaf posted a blog post about bluesky that ruffled some feathers:
> https://fiatjaf.com/ab1127fb.html
>
> This triggered a long skeet stream reply from bluesky developer Paul
> Frazee: https://staging.bsky.app/profile/pfrazee.com/post/3jv72j3fp6g2r
> (you need to be on bluesky to read it)
>
> This then caused me to write up some thoughts:
>
> The world of decentralized protocols is gaining momentum, and it's
> exciting to see projects like Nostr and Bluesky at the forefront. Many of
> us have dedicated years to developing these protocols, and now they're
> capturing global interest. I've been tracking various decentralized social
> media protocols for a long time, and if you're interested, you can find my
> comprehensive database of open social media protocol projects here:
> https://airtable.com/shri7e7EHoTi0cEjO
>
> Nostr, at_protocol, and other projects take inspiration from Secure
> Scuttlebutt, which I had the pleasure of working on alongside talented
> individuals like @pfrazee and @jay. Nostr is a slightly modified version of
> Scuttlebutt, while at_protocol represents a more significant reimagining.
> At_protocol borrows ideas from the IPFS ecosystem and W3C DID standards,
> while Nostr incorporates concepts from Bitcoin technology (not a blockchain
> or cryptocurrency project). Both projects have received substantial support
> from Jack Dorsey, who funds them but doesn't control their direction.
>
> Nostr began as a humble side project, growing organically as developers
> adopted it. In contrast, Bluesky started with significant press and a
> high-profile search for a team lead, taking years to evolve from an idea to
> a funded project. Bluesky's community experienced challenges that led to a
> split, and the original community renamed itself
> https://dsocialcommons.org/. Nostr, on the other hand, never encountered
> such issues, with developers contributing to the project independently.
>
> The two projects represent different approaches to open source
> development: the cathedral model (Bluesky) and the bazaar model (Nostr).
> Both have seen success, but I must express my disappointment with Bluesky's
> choice to follow the cathedral model. Despite my frustration, I have great
> admiration for the team behind Bluesky and the work they're doing. However,
> Bluesky employees maintain full control over the at_protocol, leaving
> little room for external contributors.
>
> In contrast, Nostr provides an open platform for contributions, enabling
> me to create an app (nos.social) and write specifications that are openly
> debated: https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/pull/457. Bluesky's code
> is indeed open source, but their development process is not. This is
> reminiscent of how Safari's WebKit or Android operate as open source
> projects without truly embracing the open source development methodology.
>
> Recently, I expressed concerns about Bluesky as it currently operates as a
> single unified network. Friends advised me to take a step back and give the
> team time. I experimented with their Indigo PDS server and found it
> promising. I believe that the at_protocol will eventually become an open,
> multi-server protocol. The people behind Bluesky have a long history of
> working on open protocols and are not developing this technology to create
> a new, closed ecosystem.
>
> On a personal note, I feel a stronger social connection to Bluesky's early
> adopter community but appreciate Nostr's openness for contributions. I
> could potentially create an at_protocol client, but making substantial
> contributions to the Bluesky protocol seems reserved for employees and
> select advisors. Therefore, I choose to invest my time and effort in open
> projects. I firmly believe in Conway's law, which states that the structure
> of the organization building a technology will shape the technology itself.
>
> I believe @fiatjaf might be overly critical of Bluesky. He had the luxury
> of working in obscurity without the pressure of media attention while
> figuring things out. In contrast, Bluesky faces high expectations and the
> responsibility to "replace Twitter." The stress that the Bluesky team
> endures while trying to develop their project under the watchful eyes of
> many likely contributed to their adoption of the cathedral model of open
> source. I empathize with the challenges they face in this environment.
>
> Much of the internet was built using the bazaar model, consisting of small
> pieces loosely joined. This approach gave us the web and numerous other
> systems we use today. Bluesky's design-driven model is more meticulously
> architected, but it reminds me of Java and XML (no offense intended).
>
> I believe that these networks can interoperate. I already communicate
> between the fediverse and Nostr daily, and while it's not perfect, it
> mostly works. I'm optimistic that we'll achieve similar interoperability
> with at_protocol once the system becomes more open. It is essential to
> recognize the strengths and weaknesses of both approaches and to appreciate
> the incredible work and progress made in both projects. As the world of
> decentralized protocols continues to grow, I remain hopeful for a future
> that embraces collaboration and openness.
>
> -rabble
>

These comparison tables are really useful:

rabble air table:
https://airtable.com/shri7e7EHoTi0cEjO/tblGfBcmj5sJzk2WK/viwPJRXjBeELkIaZZ?blocks=hide
wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_software_and_protocols_for_distributed_social_networking


>
> --
> evan.henshaw-plath.com - @rabble <https://twitter.com/rabble/>
> schedule calls: calendly.com/rabble
>
>
> On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 9:31 PM Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> út 9. 5. 2023 v 11:26 odesílatel Marcus Rohrmoser <me+swicg@mro.name>
>> napsal:
>>
>>> On 30 Apr 2023, at 21:22, Bob Wyman wrote:
>>>
>>> > who it is that decides the rules (for what will or will not be seen).
>>>
>>> If the decision-maker can actually be held accountable per case, I am
>>> all with you.
>>>
>>> However, I see such rarely.
>>>
>>> Usually machine executed rules result in covered up or even dissolved
>>> responsibilities that you can't realistically hold anybody accountable for
>>> or appeal to.
>>>
>>> In the end it's all about agency, accountability, reliability and trust.
>>> We have to check against those values over and over again and not accept
>>> regress.
>>>
>>
>> Unfortunately BlueSky have had a bit of a PR disaster and then a
>> following "skeet" (sky-tweet) stream.
>>
>> Jack Dorsey, founder of bluesky, made a post yesterday, which linked to
>> an article entitled "BlueSky is a scam"
>>
>> https://fiatjaf.com/ab1127fb.html
>>
>> While quite a harsh critique, the article has technical merit.
>>
>> The gist of it is that bluesky was created to be an open system, but is
>> far too closed, right now.
>>
>> It could be turned around, but I think they need to act, and open source
>> their app ASAP.  And perhaps get in some new people with a more open
>> mentality.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> /Marcus
>>>
>>>