3 ms·
The distinction is that Mastodon doesn't have to grow, and Bluesky does. There's an extent to which Bluesky is viable because its venture-funded owner pays for
by tptacek 3mo ago
The distinction is that Mastodon doesn't have to grow, and Bluesky does. There's an extent to which Bluesky is viable because its venture-funded owner pays for the infrastructure it operates on (Mastodon communities generally have to stand on their own two feet). If there's no path for Bluesky to grow into a viable business on its current financial runway, the funding for the infrastructure will end.
- singpolyma3 3mo agoWe already have others running infrastructure as well so if bsky goes away the platform can survive
- captainbland 3mo agoWill it though? Where mastodon is much more distributed, bluesky/ATProto use is highly concentrated on bsky.app
- mrbn100ful 3mo agoATProto needs bluesky to survive. The only source of truth is hosted by bluesky https://github.com/bluesky-social/atproto/discussions/1892 https://github.com/bluesky-social/atproto/discussions/1892 https://github.com/bluesky-social/atproto/discussions/2821 https://github.com/bluesky-social/atproto/discussions/2821
- GCUMstlyHarmls 3mo agoIt also feels like people running ActivityPub instances are in it for "the culture", it's grass roots, moxie, free, hacker, whatever. ATProto doesn't have the same vibe.
- inigyou 3mo agoOver 99.99% of users (actual number, not hyperbole) are using bluesky's infrastructure. If it goes away, the platform dies.
- Karrot_Kream 3mo agoATProto infrastructure is mostly open and there are folks operating pieces of it independently even if the landscape is dominated by the Bluesky PBC. It's true that Mastodon grew bottom-up without centralized funding so the shuttering of the PBC will be a big deal for the AT ecosystem but it's all independently doable.
- tptacek 3mo agoEverything is doable, I'm just completing the comparison the preceding comment made.
- skybrian 2mo agoI imagine the ATProto infrastructure would survive. Declining activity would be bad for BlueSky, but running a firehose is not that expensive. Many people could fund it themselves. Also, it would get cheaper to run as traffic declines. Also, the firehose is not strictly necessary either if you’re willing to give up seeing replies from anyone, anywhere and just see the feeds you subscribe to, like an RSS reader. The hard part is moderation and keeping up with changes in regulations, not the infrastructure itself. Also, continued funding for new development is good. I’m interested in seeing what the permissioned data proposal [1] turns into. [1] https://github.com/bluesky-social/proposals/tree/main/0016-permissioned-data https://github.com/bluesky-social/proposals/tree/main/0016-p...