7mo ago

Bluesky Is Building The Decentralized Social Media Jack Dorsey Wants, Even If He Doesn’t Realize It

www.techdirt.com Bluesky Is Building The Decentralized Social Media Jack Dorsey Wants, Even If He Doesn’t Realize It

There was a bit of news in the world of decentralized social media over the past few weeks. It kicked off with the announcement that Jack Dorsey had left the board of Bluesky. This was followed by …

News @lemmy.world

www.techdirt.com /2024/05/13/bluesky-is-building-the-decentralized-social-media-jack-dorsey-wants-even-if-he-doesnt-realize-it/

23 3

Technology @lemmy.world

Bluesky Is Building The Decentralized Social Media Jack Dorsey Wants, Even If He Doesn’t Realize It

www.techdirt.com /2024/05/13/bluesky-is-building-the-decentralized-social-media-jack-dorsey-wants-even-if-he-doesnt-realize-it/

29 0

You're viewing part of a thread.

Show Context

18 comments

I meant niche in terms of amount of users, not implementations.
- But amount of users is actually more a product of marketing than any technical protocol so I don't really see that point either. Also I don't see that being true, especially if you count in all the threads users.
  My point of it being a W3C standard is more that it is a protocol that is in somewhat responsible hands. When using a protocol that was developed by and only for one (commercial) application in minds other players are always one step behind.
  Mastodon (or threads) as the main platforms that implement AP don't have any more influence on the protocol than any other platform as well.
  
  I wrote a long answer to this, but forgot to post and lost it :(. But here's what I wanted to say:
  I forgot about Threads, that's indeed a big user base.
  Just because the standard is managed by the W3C doesn't mean they'll do a good job of managing it, but it's probably more positive than negative.
  I don't know enough about how the W3C is organised and accepts contributions, but wasn't one of the concerns of many AP users when threads announced their AP integration, that threads would immediately become a big player and essentially EEE AP? Tbh, I still fear that.
  I'm enjoying this conversation, it's brought my hopes for AP a bit higher, I hope I've managed to convince you that nostr is something to keep an eye on.
  
  Yes this EEE fear exists but I think it's unreasonable in my eyes. AP being managed by W3C is one reason for it.
  Sure Meta will probably extend AP for their own use but it's not that they can simply decide that the new feature that they introduced and is at first only working on their platform is the standard from now.
  I definitely agree that Nostr is something to keep an eye on but for me that's more about to see if there is stuff that works and can be introduced in AP as well. Because of all the arguments above I don't think we should all switch to Nostr now.
  
  Sure Meta will probably extend AP for their own use but it's not that they can simply decide that the new feature that they introduced and is at first only working on their platform is the standard from now.
  Maybe not formally, but it might not matter. Looking at how google implemented XMPP, then slightly changed their implemetentaion until it was incompatible, and clients tried to keep up with changes, makes me fear meta will do something similar.
  
  Yes they probably will.
  But my point would be that with AP being W3C and not management by meta or a different company the ecosystem of it can survive.
  And too be fair until recently I still used XMPP so it was never dead. I think it was just that almost no one ever heard about it before Google used it and also almost no one really cared about it while Google used it. So the resulting consequence was that once Google dropped off completely it went back to no one really using it (like it was before).
  AP already having a decent user base (some million active users, official accounts and instances of big institutions like the EU commission e.g.) even without threads and a big eco system(very diverse platforms and projects), there is no need for any platform to adapt to anything coming from meta. Things are good (enough) how they are currently.
  It's not that we need to compete or couldn't exist without Meta.
  
  Yeah, I thought of these points too, my fear is that it won't matter that it isn't managed by meta and people will go along with whatever meta does.
  Though to be completely fair, I have the exact same fear for other decentralised protocols, including nostr. Perhaps the only one I think is resilient to this situation is bitcoin, for better or for worse.

18 comments