Salta al contenuto principale


Running a full-network Bluesky relay costs less ($19) than my beefy but ~single user Mastodon hosted instance ($24).

People underestimate how much data optimized software can move through efficient protocols on modern non-cloud hardware.

whtwnd.com/bnewbold.net/3lo7a2…

in reply to Filippo Valsorda

The relay is the supposedly centralized part of Bluesky because “too big” to run! $19/month!

The bsky.app AppView is bigger but every Mastodon instance is an AppView (and PDS), and if you were ok with Mastodon-style partial views of the network, AppViews would be cheap too.

in reply to Filippo Valsorda

$19/month is really inefficient when it comes to the capabilities of computers
in reply to Filippo Valsorda

on the flipside, you can literally run "mastodon compatible" software like GoToSocial on your cars entertainment unit so... y'know ;p
in reply to Filippo Valsorda

I am curious how Bluesky's approach to development will turn out.
Some else described it as “Bluesky started as a (well-designed) centralized network, and each component is gradually decentralized”.

Maybe this will lead to a better software in the end, and I hope the goal of a truly decentralized social network will be reached ultimately.

in reply to Varbin ​

@varbin Well, everything was designed from the beginning with the intention that it should be decentralizable
in reply to Filippo Valsorda

@Filippo Valsorda I am spending 21 euros per month to manage two instances with a total of 800 users (poliverso.org and poliversity.it), of which more than half are active users for less than a month and who are extremely connected to the rest of the Fediverse.
in reply to Cybersecurity & cyberwarfare

@cybersecurity In my experience the bottleneck is the number of followers of the largest account, which does mean a single user instance is inefficiently sitting idle most of the time, yeah.
in reply to Filippo Valsorda

@Filippo Valsorda Let's say that what impacts the performance of an instance is the combination of two aspects:
1) the total number of users of other instances followed by the users of your instance
2) the number of instances to which the followed users belong

The number of contents created, on the other hand, impacts much less.

For this reason, an instance with a single user who follows tens of thousands of users who are on hundreds of different instances, fundamentally suffers from the same problems as an instance with 100-1000 users.

This is also one of the reasons why, proportionally, larger instances (over 10,000 active users) suffer less than small ones: in fact, large instances are more self-referential (users of the same instance follow each other more) and count on greater funding; in small instances, on the other hand, users must mainly follow users of other instances and donations are obviously less.

The fact remains that the costs are generally low when compared to Bluesky or even premium accounts of any commercial social network: after all, the Fediverse, unlike Bluesky or a commercial social network, allows you to have a self-managed and virtually independent server.

⇧