3 ms·

I've never really gotten AT protocol. It just seems like reïnventing the web. I guess it's a little more secure than the normal web because there's no JS, and y

I've never really gotten AT protocol. It just seems like reïnventing the web. I guess it's a little more secure than the normal web because there's no JS, and you can make it seem more integrated because users won't have custom styles, but neither of these are particularly appealing to me. HTML + RSS does basically the same job, and then link aggregator sites like news.ycombinator.com recommend content much better than the algorithms you get in social media. I guess the big advantage is reposts and comments, but practically you could achieve these in the regular web through indexing with backlinks. The conceptual service Bluesky is providing is essentially just a web-index of items published using the AT protocol.

danabramov 1y ago
I tried to make a pretty extensive case for it at https://overreacted.io/open-social/#open-social https://overreacted.io/open-social/#open-social, I'd suggest reading it with an open mind to form an opinion. I think there's quite a few interesting aspects there, like apps being able to "piggyback on" data from other apps. I wouldn't call AT a "reinvention" of the web, personally I see it as a minor bump that codifies some conventions that let apps interoperate while keeping the source of user data outside those apps. New products can be started from data of other (even defunct) products and remix it. That's pretty powerful.
- James_K 1y ago
  I'm still not really convinced. Look at it from my perspective: I have my website, BSky isn't compatible with the web, therefore I would have to provide two different versions of all content I publish to satisfy someone else's protocol. It's very annoying. It would be simpler and more effective if it was built on existing web technologies. The only actually new things AT and BSky provide is a signature scheme for content, and the ability to store replies, follows, and likes. You manage most of that in as a few HTML meta tags à la OpenGraph. The other parts of it already exist, those being a web-page designer and an indexer.

danabramov 1y ago

I tried to make a pretty extensive case for it at https://overreacted.io/open-social/#open-social https://overreacted.io/open-social/#open-social, I'd suggest reading it with an open mind to form an opinion. I think there's quite a few interesting aspects there, like apps being able to "piggyback on" data from other apps. I wouldn't call AT a "reinvention" of the web, personally I see it as a minor bump that codifies some conventions that let apps interoperate while keeping the source of user data outside those apps. New products can be started from data of other (even defunct) products and remix it. That's pretty powerful.

James_K 1y ago
I'm still not really convinced. Look at it from my perspective: I have my website, BSky isn't compatible with the web, therefore I would have to provide two different versions of all content I publish to satisfy someone else's protocol. It's very annoying. It would be simpler and more effective if it was built on existing web technologies. The only actually new things AT and BSky provide is a signature scheme for content, and the ability to store replies, follows, and likes. You manage most of that in as a few HTML meta tags à la OpenGraph. The other parts of it already exist, those being a web-page designer and an indexer.