- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
cross-posted from: https://programming.dev/post/27143191
Why I recommend against Bluesky.
Have you ever heard of the term federation-washing?
cross-posted from: https://programming.dev/post/27143191
Why I recommend against Bluesky.
Have you ever heard of the term federation-washing?
Idk I’m kinda used to it, maybe that’s from growing up with Aol handing out disks at the supermarket to this. Being a refugee doesn’t bother me. If anything the ability to tank a corpo by making something new is kinda fun.
That being said I can see a point where that becomes impossible or just too difficult financially. That other comment about it needing basically 300 m to start a new instance really got me thinking. Is it just impossible for bluesky to fix itself now? I can see why it’s not a priority from a corpo perspective but is this something that the team could fix if they made it a priority now? or is the need to keep one ID simply in compatible with the fedverse?
Why would they want to “fix” it?
I want Twitter to fail for how it’s turned, but until shown otherwise, bluesky is another closed system. It’s better than Twitter and I hope they prove me wrong.
Because they don’t want to be twitter clone 7 in 5 years? I personally don’t care because I never used Twitter, but I use Bluesky to yell at senators in between emails and phone calls. So I am fine with abandoning the platform when it’s no longer useful for that.
The digital refugee system will continue as projects start and either collapse or thrive long enough to become corpo garbage.
Bluesky is in a position to really change that as more and more people ditch twitter. Users don’t even have to understand the fedverse or decentralization to use it. They should want to not become the next MySpace or worse.