• comfy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Technically? No. (ActivityPub)

    Culturally? No. (Venture capitalist for-profit and already beginning the resulting enshittification)

    I don’t see any reason to consider them part of the Fediverse.

  • CapriciousDay@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    Not really. You’re strongly funnelled down the bluesky owned instance, most uses of ATProto are more or less mere plugins for that main instance. Can I migrate my account to another instance? Unclear.

    The VC funding also adds another layer that implies they’re going to trap people into their monetisable market share sooner or later. This seems incompatible with fediverse principles.

    So while they present themselves as a more technically refined iteration of the fediverse, the whole thing is a big trap. Enjoy it while it lasts would be my advice, but if you’ve got the sway then try to get those close to you to migrate to mastodon before it goes wrong.

  • StrawberryPigtails@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    3 hours ago

    I’d say no.

    I don’t think they federate. Least ways, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a post from a bluesky account, on lemmy or mastodon, and SDF hadn’t blocked them server side last I checked.

    I think they’re a bit like truth social, not federating and off doing their own thing.

  • Elaine Cortez@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Nope. If I create a post on Bluesky, my posts aren’t going to appear on other sites unless I or someone else shares them.

    • Samantha Xavia@bikersgo.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      6 hours ago

      What counts as apart of the Fediverse then? Is it the protocol of ActivityPub or that it connects all together? As there is a bridge for Bluesky.

      • black0ut@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 hour ago

        The fact that it needs a bridge is what makes it not federated. Federation allows for interconnection without bridges, because everything talks the same protocol. You can bridge Discord to Matrix, and that doesn’t mean Discord is federated.

      • Fluffy Kitty Cat@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        5 hours ago

        The reason is because it’s just more corporate sloth that has fake federation. If it was even remotely realistic to run a Federated service people would be by the dozens because they have way more users than we do. The only working Federate ironically the activity Pub Bridge

      • TabbsTheBat@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Basically yes… I mean… you could just look it up and see the sources say the same thing about activitypub

  • asudox@lemmy.asudox.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    5 hours ago

    No. They’re another Twitter clone that is already starting to show their bullshit. And the people there never learn.

  • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    While the Fediverse has traditionally been the network most commonly referred to and used as an example regarding the subject of decentralized social networks, alternatives to it and the accompanying ActivityPub have been developed and deployed. A major protocol in competition with the Fediverse is the AT Protocol, which powers the Bluesky social network and has formed its own separate network dubbed by developers as the Atmosphere

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fediverse

    So no it is not. Basically Fediverse = activitypub
    Bluesky doesnt even properly federate with instance using their own protocol so its not even in any way comparable to the fediverse.

      • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Thats exactly what it sounds like, a “bridge”. An island doesnt stop being an island because it is connected to mainland with a bridge. You could also bridge twitter or facebook to mastodon, but that wouldnt make them part of the fediverse.

        A bridge is just a piece of software that receives data from one protocol and re-formats it into another protocol. You could bridge SMS to bluesky if you wanted.

        • Samantha Xavia@bikersgo.socialOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          Okay, but is bluesky at least a setting stone for people to be in a slightly better place than Faceook or Twitter? I don’t like Bluesky as the next Fediverse user, especially as they’ve went out of there way to create a protocol that’s unsecure and a platform that is semi-centralised but people are learning about alternatives like us from them what is at least helpful in someway.

          • Ephera@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            4 hours ago

            It’s better in some ways for now. All commercial social media platforms start out by being less bad than the competition. That’s how they attract users. When they have enough of a user base for network effects to take hold, that’s when they enshittify.

          • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            4 hours ago

            at least a setting stone for people to be in a slightly better place than Faceook or Twitter?

            No, not really. It has already started caving to Turkish political censorship requests for example. They are implementing checkmark bullshit and from the start they required you to have an account to view all content.

            but people are learning about alternatives like us

            99% of bluesky users have never heard of the fediverse or anything like that. They just blindly follow the herd to the next platform like always. In a few years bluesky will turn to complete shit and then they will once again jump to the next garbage platform.

  • Zak@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    5 hours ago

    No, because I can’t use it on entirely thord-party infrastructure and interact with BlueSky users. It should be possible in theory, but if it was practical in reality, somebody would be doing it.

  • lily33@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    Currently not, because it’s not de-facto decentralized. There would need to be multiple relays, managed by different organizations, AND multiple app views, also managed by different orgs, for me to consider it such.

    The non-existence of de facto decentralization indicates that the ecosystem doesn’t actually promote decentralization, even though it technically allows for it.

    • Samantha Xavia@bikersgo.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Yeah from my understanding they call it decentralized but they put it through a centralized one they control through there protocol to verify content for everyone to see, so not so decentralized in the whole of everything.

      • lily33@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        Well, you can theoretically make a second app-view “instance”, call it “Greenearth” or something, and have different policies than Bluesky on how to verify or select content. But until someone actually does so, it’s not really decentralized. I’m not sure what’s stopping people from doing so, but it’s been a while, so I assume there must be some roadblock.

        There’s also the issue of how Blueky itself was depicted as the decentralized network - when it’s more akin to a single instance, instead.

        • underscores@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 hours ago

          It’s designed so other relays need to handle every message sent on all of bluesky, so server costs would be way too high for most people. Like car prices for minimal bluesky relay setup, and way more if you want to actually store all the messages you’re processing.