4 ms·
You could definitely build a read-only one; only account creation and the things that go with it are invite-only, the rest is already public and distributed. I
by brundolf 3y ago
You could definitely build a read-only one; only account creation and the things that go with it are invite-only, the rest is already public and distributed. I don't know of a client like you describe existing yet, but I could use the API endpoints I've already worked with to build one if I wanted to take the time.
Edit: here's one https://skypulse.dvy.io/ https://skypulse.dvy.io/
- mg 3y agoThe invite-only aspect is part of the protocol?
- brundolf 3y agoThere's an underlying protocol (AT protocol), and then there's the Bluesky app that's built on top of it (and has its own public API, etc). Only the Bluesky layer requires authentication (and is therefore gated behind closed signups for now). My understanding is it's mainly gated because they're a tiny team experiencing explosive growth, so they have to make sure it doesn't take down the whole system (they recently had to migrate DBs because users doubled in 24 hours) High-level explanation of the protocol: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35822267 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35822267
- mg 3y agoBut why are there no other public webclients that let you create an identity and communicate via the AT protocol?
- brundolf 3y agoThere's a layer of data and interaction that exists at the application level right now. I don't know exactly where the line is drawn between the two, but I think eg. likes might be at the bsky level right now (while posts themselves are at the AT Protocol level) I believe the team plans to move as many things as possible down to the AT level over time
- tedunangst 3y agoBecause currently nobody communicates via AT. There's nobody to talk to.