So, if you’re online poisoned like me, you may have noticed that Bluesky CEO Jay Graber has been having sort of a slow motion, low-key public meltdown for the past several weeks. Most recently, in this interaction with a user.
@jcsalterego.bsky.social on Bluesky: "(bluesky user bursts into Waffle House) OH SO YOU HATE PANCAKES??" @jay.bsky.team quotes posts this with: "Too real. We're going to try to fix this. Social media doesn't have to be this way." @antioccident.bsky.social replies to jay asking "have y'all banned Jesse Singal yet or" and Jay responds with "WAFFLES"
[…]
Even with practical technical decentralization, the vast majority of Bluesky users are on, well, Bluesky. Bluesky was never really packaged as something that was relatively easy for someone to spin up on their own servers; the network has been historically extremely centralized, and only small minorities of users have broken off.

AT Proto decentralization doesn’t exist as a practical reality, and if it ever does it won’t be for years. Most of the work driving effective decentralization is being done by third parties, who have limited guarantees about future compatibility with possible breaking changes on Bluesky’s end.

Bluesky inc isn’t really making ‘a protocol’, they’re making Bluesky, the monolithic (to within a rounding error) social network that they operate.

I do genuinely believe that the Bluesky team set off from the start to create a decentralized protocol, but unfortunately for them they ended up running a social network. And at this point, AT Proto has become essentially a sort of ideological vaporware; a way for Jay Graber et al to run a social media platform while claiming they don’t run a social media platform.

This is, of course, just another iteration of the Silicon Valley monoproduct: power without accountability. The tech industry elite are very much like Gilded Age railroad barons – buying up whole towns, breaking up strikes, imposing top-down economic policy on whole sectors – except all the while they claim that they are just technology enthusiasts playing with their little trains.

  • poVoq@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 day ago

    Modern webservers don’t have a problem serving thousands of requests as long as they are spaced out a bit timewise. And since each AP instance only sees and interacts with a small part of the overall network it should not become an issue to expand the network horizontally. It is anyways probably better to think of interconected archipelagos and not of a singular network in the case of ActivityPub.

    • naught101@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      Is that really true though? Say we end up with 10k servers with 100-1000 users each, even if only 10% of those users have a connection to a server that no one rose on their server is connected to, that’s still a highly connected network.

      Then add boosts from other servers (that incentivise cross-network follows)…

      • poVoq@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        Mastodon already has those numbers you mention and there are no performance issues in the overall network.

        • naught101@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 hours ago

          I don’t believe that’s true… It currently has around 9k servers, but I think the vast majority of those will have less than 10 users.

          Anyway, there’s currently about 1m active users, so the real question is will it scale by 3 orders of magnitude? And my point being that I’d expect the network to become more connected as it scales (at least for the main archipelago, which is probably always going to house a majority of users).

          • poVoq@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 hours ago

            MAU is a very incomplete measure of active users as by far the most users lurk and post very little.

            In total numbers Mastodon has about 10m users and only 30% of those are on mastodon.social, the rest is distributed on the 9k other instances. That’s pretty close to the scenario you stated.