Unfortunately, Bluesky is unavailable in Mississippi right now, due to a new state law that requires age verification for all users. While intended for child safety, we think this law poses broader challenges & creates significant barriers that limit free speech & harm smaller platforms like ours.
reshared this
Bluesky
in reply to Bluesky • • •With legal challenges to this law pending, we cannot justify building the expensive required infrastructure. For now, we have made the difficult decision to block access in Mississippi. To learn more, read our blog post:
Our Response to Mississippi’s ...
Our Response to Mississippi’s Age Assurance Law - Bluesky
BlueskyEugen Rochko
in reply to Bluesky • • •reshared this
Andrea Bontempi, Kotes, Mastodon Migration, just small circles 🕊, FediThing 🏳️🌈, Robert Kingett, 笹木アカリ Sasaki Akari e Chase reshared this.
Jay 🆘
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Eugen Rochko
in reply to Jay 🆘 • • •reshared this
wakest ⁂, Mastodon Migration e william.maggos reshared this.
Michael 🇺🇦
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •legiscan.com/MS/text/HB1126/id…
Laurens Hof
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Eugen Rochko
in reply to Laurens Hof • • •Mastodon Migration reshared this.
Anuj Ahooja
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •There is no gatekeeper for how you tap into the ATProto network as well. Here's a short list of just some of the ways Bsky PBC can't block a user's access today: bsky.app/profile/jackvalinsky.…
And there's even more options than that out there.
@laurenshof @jsit @bsky.app
Anuj Ahooja
in reply to Anuj Ahooja • • •In fact, we're tapping into the network right now as we're having this conversation.
@laurenshof @jsit @bsky.app
lights_rage
in reply to Anuj Ahooja • • •jack
in reply to Anuj Ahooja • • •also it’s waaaay easier to setup a PDS than any AP software. i eventually got this GoToSocial one up, but my atproto PDS was far easier.
i’m 16 and i got my atproto PDS up in less than an hour..lol - with that you can bypass laws with custom scripts to change your region etc 😁
Eugen Rochko
in reply to jack • • •jack
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Not *anybody*, there are multiple third party relays and appviews in operation - look at microcosm.blue/
and you could argue that mastodon.social connects a lot of the fediverse. this morning I finished setting up this instance and when I boosted it from my old acc on mastodon.social the instances that federated with this GTS instance went up by over 100… if you started blocking many instances, or had to shutdown, the fediverse would be very broken
microcosm: atproto building blocks
www.microcosm.blueEugen Rochko
in reply to jack • • •Anuj Ahooja
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Again, if you look at the link I've sent you in this thread, you'll see why this isn't true (specifically, see Red Dwarf)
@jack @laurenshof @jsit @bsky.app
Ben Royce 🇺🇦
in reply to Anuj Ahooja • • •Anuj Ahooja
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •If you see the post I linked to one reply above, it'll be clear that no user is beholden to the PBC.
@jack @laurenshof @jsit @bsky.app
Eugen Rochko
in reply to Anuj Ahooja • • •See this analysis of the Bluesky architecture by someone way smarter than me:
dustycloud.org/blog/how-decent…
How decentralized is Bluesky really? -- Dustycloud Brainstorms
dustycloud.orgAnuj Ahooja
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I have read the full back and forth of that conversation, but it doesn't seem like you're looking at what I've sent that proves decentralization.
@jack @laurenshof @jsit @bsky.app
Eugen Rochko
in reply to Anuj Ahooja • • •Anuj Ahooja
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Red Dwarf doesn't use Bsky if you're not on their PDSs as well. Blacksky is early and is already the biggest non-Bsky non-bot PDS hoster and has built the whole ATProto stack from scratch in Rust. And there's more. This goes way deeper than you think it does.
@jack @laurenshof @jsit @bsky.app
Eugen Rochko
in reply to Anuj Ahooja • • •Anuj Ahooja
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •So are we agreeing that ATProto is decentralized? Because that's different than the fear of what funding will potentially lead to one day in the future.
And if you fear that, then shouldn't we triple down on making sure that the PBC doesn't hold all the power before that happens, do adversarial interop, and make sure it's in it's ideal decentralized state asap?
@jack @laurenshof @jsit @bsky.app
Eugen Rochko
in reply to Anuj Ahooja • • •eblu
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Sean Tilley likes this.
Ben Royce 🇺🇦
in reply to eblu • • •the misinformation in question is representing centralized social media like bluesky as if it were decentralized
we all understand the amazing tech that *promises* decentralization but the *reality* is that it is not
the fediverse is genuinely decentralized, and bluesky may one day be decentralized
but it isn't now
and this upsets people like yourself who view the issue in cultish terms: how dare someone cite reality
Joe (TBA) 🇺🇸
in reply to Ben Royce 🇺🇦 • • •Ben Royce 🇺🇦
in reply to Joe (TBA) 🇺🇸 • • •the essential problem with #bluesky is that it promises a lot, but delivers little in the realm of #decentralization (reality, not technical potential)
now there's something interesting about that:
bluesky is run by #crypto bros
in crypto, promising a lot, not delivering, but generating devotion off of the promise, is the standard grift template
and you see it in the cultish denial of many commenting here
Mastodon Migration reshared this.
Pusher of Pixels
in reply to Ben Royce 🇺🇦 • • •a more modern take on self hosted/decentralized Bluesky whtwnd.com/bnewbold.net/3lo7a2…
(which I found from pluralistic.net/2025/08/15/dog…)
Cory said he wasn't going to Bluesky until he could self host...and it seems like his criteria are being met finally
A Full-Network Relay for $34 a Month | bryan newbold
whtwnd.comBen Royce 🇺🇦
in reply to Pusher of Pixels • • •i read that entire article a few days ago, i don't remember cory saying anything like "his criteria are being met finally"
what i remember is cory being mystified by bluesky's new TOS
do you have a clear indication cory is doing that?
Pusher of Pixels
in reply to Ben Royce 🇺🇦 • • •Ben Royce 🇺🇦
in reply to Pusher of Pixels • • •thank you
and of course cory's reach on bluesky will be limited in places like mississippi
now the "you don't need to be on bluesky to read that though" reply guys
missing the entire point of bluesky's de facto centralization
Pusher of Pixels
in reply to Ben Royce 🇺🇦 • • •yeah, it's a similar thing I say about civil rights. The most interesting cases pit 2 rights against each other.
I'm happy BS (my name for them haha) is slowly getting to some de-centralization capability...but how that will play with their monied backers will be an interesting thing to watch.
Ben Royce 🇺🇦
in reply to Pusher of Pixels • • •yup
the looming issue with #bluesky:
bluesky is financially backdoored such that as it grows in popularity it will suffer the same fate that befell #twitter
investors will demand a return, a return that can't be delivered without centralization
and then they engineer a takeover putting an elon #musk type at the helm
this is how #plutocracy destroys #socialMedia
enjoy bluesky
but it's doomed
Clinton Anderson SwordForHire
in reply to Ben Royce 🇺🇦 • • •eblu
in reply to Clinton Anderson SwordForHire • • •Ben Royce 🇺🇦
in reply to eblu • • •"we understand vulture capital will destroy #bluesky, and we've prepared for that by making it possible to have rebel bases"
"why don't you just use something that is already decentralized, like #mastodon/ #fediverse"
"you don't understand, this is a cult-centered discussion"
...
"in case the shareholders come knocking"
"in case"
🤦♂️
Joe (TBA) 🇺🇸
in reply to Ben Royce 🇺🇦 • • •Ben Royce 🇺🇦
in reply to Joe (TBA) 🇺🇸 • • •exactly
the person i responded to is talking about "in case" shareholders come knocking
like "in case" my mouth goes on fire after eating chili peppers
🤦
bluesky is doomed
the crypto bro venture capitalists *will* demand a return on their investment, and apparently some believe you just send them away
no. they send you away:
they replace the leadership to get their money
Joe (TBA) 🇺🇸
in reply to Ben Royce 🇺🇦 • • •Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to Ben Royce 🇺🇦 • • •Ben Royce 🇺🇦
in reply to Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋 • • •if i loan you $200, i want my money back
you, a board, whatever entity you are, needs to pay it back
you need to make moves to satisfy me, your investor
if you don't, i can go after you
so usually you will say "ok, i'll do this to earn some money"
this is how venture capital can destroy anything
app.dealroom.co/companies/blue…
Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to Joe (TBA) 🇺🇸 • • •Joe (TBA) 🇺🇸
in reply to Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋 • • •Ben Royce 🇺🇦
in reply to Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋 • • •i don't understand what you're saying
"something else failed so this other thing over here won't fail"?
Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to Ben Royce 🇺🇦 • • •Ben Royce 🇺🇦
in reply to Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋 • • •bluesky will fail in the same way any entity controlled by venture capital will fail if it doesn't earn enough. like twitter didn't. instead, the ghouls moved in when they didn't get their money back
it doesn't matter about the technology. it doesn't matter if it's a social media company or if they are a high end waffle restaurant: they need to earn money on an investment
George Saich
in reply to Ben Royce 🇺🇦 • • •Mastodon Migration
in reply to George Saich • • •Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to Clinton Anderson SwordForHire • • •eblu
in reply to Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋 • • •this is depicting a scene from Peanuts in which Lucy (representing tech companies) holds a football (representing Bluesky) for Charlie (representing regular users) to kick. what happens next is that Lucy lifts the football right before Charlie kicks it, resulting in him falling over face up instead and humiliated. this is intended to be a metaphor for how the poster believes that Bluesky is a bait and switch propped up by large tech companies that will trap users like other social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter.
(christ I sound like a LLM right now)
Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to eblu • • •cultdev
in reply to Ben Royce 🇺🇦 • • •Jürgen Hubert
in reply to cultdev • • •Eugen Rochko
in reply to eblu • • •eblu
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •You seem to, from what I'm seeing, have a basic understanding of how the AT protocol works but not how it is decentralized in practice, and I think you might be confusing it with ActivityPub's model of distribution, but I could be wrong. A lot of us in this thread have been trying to explain this but you seem to be dismissive about it instead of understanding. I totally understand as someone who was also like this but it helps to read up about the subject from those who currently work with the protocol itself.
I also feel that you believe that Mastodon is above the law because it doesn't have any official presence in areas where age-verification laws exist, however the Mississippi law that Bluesky is protesting, for example, applies nondiscriminately to all platforms, regardless of where they are based.
I really don't want to come off as saying that Bluesky is a better platform, rather that I want to hold you accountable for any "not invented here" biases that you might have.
Eugen Rochko
in reply to eblu • • •eblu
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Yep, there's nothing really incorrect here (outside of that Mastodon is also responsible for mastodon.online). I should mention that this is also what Bluesky is essentially doing; they've blocked off access to the frontend that they control, while leaving the user data and relays that they host accessible. Anything built on their protocol can still communicate with it, and they do not have to implement geo-blocking because Bluesky does not control them.
I do understand your concern, however; there's nothing stopping them from outright blocking anything independently operated from pulling from their relays or directly from their PDSes themselves. But the same could be said about Mastodon instances through the practice of defederation.
Bluesky technically has the upper hand here because they architected their protocol in a way where each user is identified by a decentralized ID instead of a URI tied to a specific hostname, and full data portability is strictly specified, something that Mastodon only partially has an analog to, however it still remains a social issue because most people don't really want to move off of Bluesky servers at this time, or are even aware that it's an option.
Glossary of terms - AT Protocol
AT ProtocolEugen Rochko
in reply to eblu • • •Eugen Rochko
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Mastodon Migration
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Eugen Rochko
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Sean Tilley
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •@bsky.app@bsky.brid.gy I mean, yes, but: in the Fediverse, identity is tightly coupled to instances. You can move to other instances or platforms, but there’s a bunch of conditions as to whether or not it will actually work. If your instance permanently goes down all of a sudden, you basically have to start over from scratch.
I think one thing Bluesky actually got right with AT Protocol is that your identity, your PDS, and your social stream all effectively exist on separate layers. Trying to make ActivityPub do a similar thing is…technically possible, but also really, really difficult. It would require a massive undertaking.
FediThing 🏳️🌈
in reply to Sean Tilley • • •Bluesky did that by making it much more likely to centralise though?
What is the point of decentralisation if it makes centralisation more likely? Is it just to give a centralised for-profit corporation plausible deniability when asked if they're centralised? Some infrastructural relative of greenwashing?
I don't think Bluesky are in this to make a decentralised network, I think they are just in it for the money and see AT as a promotional tool which they can control and discard if something more profitable comes along.
Bluesky's "billionaire proof" is like Google's "don't be evil".
Sean Tilley
in reply to FediThing 🏳️🌈 • • •The DID:PLC piece is something we have to keep Bluesky accountable about, but it’s literally intended as a placeholder until they develop something better. It’s a point of failure for now, though, no argument there.
As @quillmatiq pointed out earlier up in the thread, Blacksky has effectively developed all of their own infrastructure from scratch, to the point that people can move off of Bluesky infra, and still interoperate with the existing Bluesky network. That stack and tooling is open source, and available to other communities to create their own networks that also interoperate.
It’s a remarkable development, but the point is that many parts of Bluesky’s network have actually become more radically decentralized and independent than before. It happened from the inside, at a grassroots level.
FediThing 🏳️🌈
in reply to Sean Tilley • • •What percentage of users depend on network parts controlled by the Bluesky Corporation?
If most people remain on infrastructure under corporate control, what's to stop the Bluesky Corporation from just raising the drawbridge if they consider it more profitable?
This is a danger on any decentralised network where most people congregate on parts controlled by one entity, and it's even worse when that entity is a VC-owned for-profit corporation.
Jürgen Hubert
in reply to Sean Tilley • • •"You can move to other instances or platforms, but there’s a bunch of conditions as to whether or not it will actually work. If your instance permanently goes down all of a sudden, you basically have to start over from scratch."
I've moved my Mastodon instance twice so far, and each went without a hitch.
And if my current instance _did_ close without a warning, I would not "start over from scratch" either - since I semi-regularly back up my user data, and could import these to a new instance.
Paul Chernoff
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •ikuturso
in reply to Anuj Ahooja • • •M. Grégoire
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Putting aside the technical issues and the Fediverse overall, will mastodon.social block Mississippi users because of this law?
@bsky.app
Jay 🆘
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I think what people need to understand is that using the Fediverse instead of Bluesky doesn't mean you aren't subject to these laws. It just means that the people who run your instance are more free to flaunt them if they choose.
I think what people are trying to say to you Eugen is that it might be advisable to tell Fediverse instance operators that this is something they should be aware of and make an informed decision about.
videah θΔ
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Eugen Rochko
in reply to videah θΔ • • •Faraiwe
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •THIS, 1173%.
This is why CORPORATE (namely vc crypto techbros) owned social media will always be Twitter2.0
The Nexus of Privacy
in reply to Jay 🆘 • • •Yep. People running fedi instances, just like people running Bluesky, have to decide whether they want to take that risk -- and how much geoblocking decreases the risk.
The tradeoffs may well be somewhat different here but it's still very messy, especially for fedi instances either based in the US or with financial ties here (like Mastodon's 501(c)(3)). Bluesky's high-profile, so they might be a more tempting target; then again they fedi isntances have a lot less resources to fund a legal defense, so maybe we're more tempting targets? There's no way to know at this point.
@jsit @Gargron
Jay 🆘
in reply to Jay 🆘 • • •David
in reply to Jay 🆘 • • •Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to David • • •David
in reply to Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋 • • •Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to David • • •David
in reply to Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋 • • •Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to David • • •David
in reply to Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋 • • •Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to David • • •Ahh, you're right, I haven't realized that version has some modified signup page…
Try through here: smol.life
smol life
Bluesky SocialDavid
in reply to Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋 • • •Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to David • • •Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋 • • •signup · tangled
tangled.shutzer
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Michael 🇺🇦
in reply to utzer • • •See the blog post: bsky.social/about/blog/08-22-2…
They implemented the check for Mississippi in their app - but since Bluesky's infrastructure is open, it seems that you still can access the network from other apps.
Mike Masnick
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Nemes Content
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •Oh this is going to be a good thread.
a man wearing 3d glasses is ho...
Mike Masnick
in reply to Nemes Content • • •Nemes Content
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •Mike Masnick
in reply to Nemes Content • • •reshared this
Scot Close e JonChevreau reshared this.
Eugen Rochko
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •Oblomov reshared this.
Mike Masnick
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Mike Masnick
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •Mike Masnick
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •Jared White (ResistanceNet ✊)
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •@gargron.mastodon.social.ap.brid.gy@mastodon.social
I continue to feel this is wrong.
*Anyone* can start a fediverse instance and be a publisher literally of 1. And yet they remain every bit as equal a participant in the overall global network.
Who today is successfully running 1-person ATProto infra and still enjoying all the features of Bluesky?
Jake
in reply to Jared White (ResistanceNet ✊) • • •Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to Jake • • •Mastodon Migration
in reply to Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋 • • •The question no one seems able to answer is who has a completely independent ATproto PDS, relay, and AppView where users can sign up?
If running all three of these is just $250 per month, why aren't there dozens of such independent AT Proto instances?
Seriously trying to understand why no one answers this question.
It seems the closest to this is currently Blacksky and they're still missing the AppView piece. Right?
cc: @folkerschamel
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •The reason it is important to answer this question is because bold claims are being made without citing any evidence by people officially associated with Bluesky, like in this thread from earlier today involving Mike Masnick and @folkerschamel: mastodon.social/@folkerschamel…
If we are to have this conversation it should be with real facts and examples not aggressive hyperbolic assertions.
Folker
2025-08-23 22:09:09
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •If Blacksky is the best example of a scaled "independent" Bluesky (ATProto) instance. Then it becomes possible to talk about how independent it actually is (no AppView yet, the DID repository). It's then also possible to look at what percentage of users are "independent" of Bluesky PBC technology.
Leaving aside the issue of the DID database, it seems like right now there are no users fully independent, or at least very few. That's just a fact.
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Introduction to AT Protocol
mackuba.euMastodon Migration
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Mastodon Migration
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •And, the number of users on the non-Bluesky side of the cut the cord test would need to be significant, say at least 25% (or pick a number) of the total ATProto user base.
Finally, the DID has to be secured in a public non-profit lock box.
This seems like the bare minimum necessary for Bluesky to claim they are truly decentralized.
Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋 • • •bnewbold.net
bnewbold.netFolker
in reply to Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋 • • •And even this is only the technical perspective, which is the simple one.
Even if all these points are fulfilled, this does not mean decentralization in practice.
To demonstrate the absurdity of the purely technical argument, you could even argue cynically that #twitter has a "credible exit" because every user can export their tweets and following list, and import it into a not-yet-existing new system ...
Jared White (ResistanceNet ✊)
in reply to Folker • • •As they say, the purpose of a system is what it does.
Until we actually see many examples of non-nerds engaging successfully in the ATmosphere without utilizing *any* infrastructure controlled in any way by Bluesky, then the claim it's a decentralized social networking protocol rings hollow.
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Jared White (ResistanceNet ✊) • • •Agreed. What is important from a user perspective is not technological potential or corporate aspirations, but ground truth current reality.
It is nice to know the potential may exist, but until it is realized it is just a possibility.
The thing that is most troubling about Bluesky and Mike Masnick's assertions is conflating this possibility with reality.
Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Mastodon Migration
in reply to Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋 • • •The fact that users "don't care" about something does not mean that it is not an important characteristic, as we are learning with each successive instance of autocratic centralized action.
Twitter people didn't care about it either, until the hammer came down.
Jake
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Folker
in reply to Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋 • • •That's the point. Right now I don't see any indication that in the foreseeable future the majority of #atmosphere users will be not on the hook of #bluesky the company.
My fear is that #atproto is a kind of #decentralizationwashing of a VC-driven company - maybe and hopefully I'm wrong, but this is what I fear.
Useful Chickadee
in reply to Folker • • •Even if it became truly decentralized, it probably wouldn't matter, considering it built its userbase on the population of folks without the wherewithal to pick an instance.
What, are the people who thought mastodon was too hard going to host their own PDS, or even bother to transport accounts?
Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to Useful Chickadee • • •Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •- while PDS and relay are very easy to set up now, the AppView isn't - there isn't much documentation about it and I think it's missing some pieces like a part that indexes the existing posts created earlier; I think it took Futur who wrote a blog post about running AppView a few months to figure it out (though now he's blazed the trail a bit)
Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋 • • •Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋 • • •- most people seem to be just fine with using Bluesky infrastructure + maybe own PDS for now
Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋 • • •Eugen Rochko
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •Okay. Please help me understand:
- Who owns bsky.app and the apps named "Bluesky" in the app stores?
- Who owns the app view the above connect to?
- Who owns the relay the above app view uses?
- Where are the parties that own the above domiciled?
reshared this
jwz e Oblomov reshared this.
Glyph
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •Mike Masnick
in reply to Glyph • • •Folker
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •Only a tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny fraction of #atproto users is not dependent on #bluesky infrastructure. Basically all #atproto users - and literally all #bluesky users - are dependent on #bluesky and their decisions. That's a simple reality which cannot be taken away by all the tech talk how cool #atproto is in theory.
reshared this
Maho Pacheco 🦝🍻 reshared this.
Glyph
in reply to Folker • • •ikuturso
in reply to Glyph • • •Mike Masnick
in reply to ikuturso • • •Mike Masnick
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •Glyph
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •Glyph
in reply to Glyph • • •Blacksky - Open Collective
opencollective.comMike Masnick
in reply to Glyph • • •Mike Masnick
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •ikuturso
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •Mike Masnick
in reply to ikuturso • • •Eugen Rochko
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •Mike Masnick
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Mastodon
Mastodon hosted on mastodon.socialEugen Rochko
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •Nathan A. Stine
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •Mike Masnick
in reply to Nathan A. Stine • • •Eugen Rochko
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •Mike Masnick
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •Folker
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •@Gargron @stinerman @ikuturso @glyph
Of course #mastadon is better positioned to wheather this mississippi law, because a) different #mastodon instances can decide differently (e.g. implementing some kind of age verification instead of blocking, giving users choices instead of #bluesky forcing down their decision to everyone's throat), and b) most instances are outside the us jurisdiction anyway and therefore don't have to worry about the mississippi law.
J.R. Cruciani
in reply to Folker • • •Pluralistic: Bluesky creates the world’s weirdest, hardest-to-understand binding arbitration clause (15 Aug 2025) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow
pluralistic.netFolker
in reply to J.R. Cruciani • • •Unlike #bluesky, #mastodon is not blocked centrally in Mississippi.
Glad to hear it.
It wouldn't have been technically possible anyway, since #mastodon is decentralized.
techcrunch.com/2025/08/29/mast…
#decentralization #activitypub #atproto #bluesky #decentralizationwashing
Mastodon says it doesn't 'have the means' to comply with age verification laws | TechCrunch
Sarah Perez (TechCrunch)Cory Doctorow
in reply to Folker • • •Folker
in reply to Cory Doctorow • • •"Bluesky is unavailable in Mississippi right now" as by the company #bluesky Social, PB itself. See the original post of this thread.
Plain, simple, and correct.
Your post is what I mean by #decentralizationwashing: Claiming theoretical #decentralization, but without real-world relevance. Basically nobody is using an own Personal Data Servers or alt client. And wouldn't evade the block anyway.
Folker
in reply to Folker • • •Unlike #bluesky, #mastodon is not blocked centrally in Mississippi.
Glad to hear it.
It wouldn't have been technically possible anyway, since #mastodon is decentralized.
techcrunch.com/2025/08/29/mast…
(Posting reply mastodon.social/@folkerschamel…, which wasn't bridged, again, but this time as reply to myself to see if bridging is working then.)
#decentralization #activitypub #atproto #decentralizationwashing
Folker
2025-08-29 19:15:45
Mike Masnick
in reply to Folker • • •Folker
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •@Gargron @stinerman @ikuturso @glyph
Discuss that with Bluesky Social PBC @bsky.app and their VC investors. As said before, I'm only the messenger.😉 Well, not even that, I'm only the message-repeater "Bluesky is unavailable in Mississippi right now"
mastodon.social/@bsky.app@bsky…
What are "mastodon instances"? I never understood that concept techies are talking like crazy about all the time. Are they the cause for "centrally block[ing]" as you say?😉
Mastodon
mastodon.socialMike Masnick
in reply to Folker • • •Mastodon
Mastodon hosted on mastodon.socialMike Masnick
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •Folker
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •Well, I'm just relaying what your colleagues of Bluesky Social PBC are saying, see my previous post - argue with them instead of me.
Or with the people of the Mississippi Free Press, who said that the action of #bluesky is a "significant blow" to them mississippifreepress.org/edito….
But yes, personally I like like the decentralized world of #mastodon and #activitypub without a single corporation controlling the infrastructure and data most users are dependent on.
Editor’s Note | Bluesky Blocks Mississippi IPs, Citing State’s Age Verification Law, Free Speech and Privacy Concerns
Ashton Pittman (Mississippi Free Press)Mastodon Migration
in reply to Folker • • •There is a big difference between truly decentralized and technically decentralizable.
See: Are we decentralized yet >>> arewedecentralizedyet.online/
Are We Decentralized Yet?
arewedecentralizedyet.onlineMastodon Migration reshared this.
Folker
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •A picture is worth a thousand words.
Folker
in reply to Folker • • •@Gargron @stinerman @ikuturso @glyph
I have no idea what this crazy tech diagram means, but I like the colors.🙃 While this large read area somehow feels really uncomfortable - like these claws wants to surround and control me 😨 - this little green sector looks really nice, friendly and comfortable.😊
mastodon.online/@mastodonmigra…
#mastodon #bluesky
Mastodon Migration
2025-08-31 19:55:18
Folker
in reply to Folker • • •An insightful article about the power, importance and impact of decentralization of social networks.
compliancehub.wiki/the-decentr…
The Decentralized Resistance: How Mississippi's Digital ID Law Met Its Match with Mastodon
Compliance Hub (Compliance Hub Wiki)Mike Masnick
in reply to Folker • • •Folker
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •@Gargron @stinerman @ikuturso @glyph
Not really.
mastodon.online/@mastodonmigra…
#mastodon #bluesky #decentralization #decentralizationwashing
Mastodon Migration
2025-09-01 16:32:39
Mike Masnick
in reply to Folker • • •Mastodon Migration
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •@folkerschamel @Gargron @stinerman @ikuturso
Again. Rather than engage with the substance of the article, MM's approach is to brush it aside with sweeping generalizations, false characterizations and ad hominem attacks. There is nothing untrue in the article. It is a good characterization of the benefits of real decentralization. Benefits that Bluesky and Mike Masnick often disingenuously trumpet when talking about "No Caesars" and the ability to "fork off."
little tricks
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Mastodon Migration
in reply to little tricks • • •It may be AI slop. Who knows these days. But the substance of the critique is consistent with that of several others on the same subject, like this from @freezenet
freezenet.ca/mastodon-isnt-com…
Or even the TechCrunch Sarah Perez @Sarahp piece.
techcrunch.com/2025/08/29/mast…
The point is to stop attacking the messengers and address the substance of the criticism.
Mastodon says it doesn't 'have the means' to comply with age verification laws | TechCrunch
Sarah Perez (TechCrunch)Folker
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •@ikuturso @glyph @Gargron
Nobody said or implied that in this thread, on the contrary.
The point is that in practice #bluesky is quite centralized, because nearly all #atproto users are dependent on #bluesky, which is controlled by one company, and their centralized decisions.
As we can witness right now.
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •Vault Boy
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •This is kinda fundamental. You say "a lot?", but that's not as convincing as a full search engine of sites who want you to join them and are all, by definition, 100% independent of any other mastodon instance. Heck, even Truth Social is a Mastodon instance. joinmastodon.org/servers
Servers
Servers
joinmastodon.orgMike Masnick
in reply to Vault Boy • • •Folker
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •That's a deflection again. Nobody doubts that technically both #activitypub and #atproto support decentralization.
But the point is that *in practice* basically all #bluesky users are concentrated on infrastructure of a single company under US jurisdiction, while #mastodon users are distributed over many servers in many jurisdictions all over the world.
The consequences can be seen with Mississippi.
mastodon.social/@ikuturso/1151…
mastodon.social/@mastodonmigra…
ikuturso (@ikuturso@mastodon.social)
MastodonMastodon Migration
in reply to Folker • • •The technique Mike Masnick employs is to ignore the substance of the critique. #Bluesky may technically be capable of decentralization, but in practice it is still highly centralized. Instead, he repeats the mantra there are some examples of decentralization.
Stipulated Mike.
Now move on to addressing the reality that for all intents and purposes, which is what matters for these censorship issues, it is centralized.
arewedecentralizedyet.online/
Are We Decentralized Yet?
arewedecentralizedyet.onlineMastodon Migration reshared this.
Mike Masnick ✅
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Mastodon Migration
in reply to Mike Masnick ✅ • • •This is a specious argument, and does not deserve a serious response. Please stop misrepresenting the current degree of centralized concentration of Bluesky PBC on AT Protocol. You are in a perfect position to advocate for actual meaningful decentralization, but instead continue to misrepresent the current overwhelming dominance of Bluesky PBC.
1/
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Rather than making false and misleading arguments you could instead stipulate that the overwhelming dominance Bluesky PBC does currently make AT Protocol a defacto centralized network, but the company recognizes this and are taking specific steps to address it. AT Protocol is designed to facilitate decentralization and list what steps are being taken, against what metrics to achieve real decentralization.
2/
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Specifically, what is the company doing to enable independent instances and provide the type of choice your marketing ballyhoos? What are your goals for achieving a meaningful percentage of the AT Protocol network users NOT being Bluesky PBC users? What programs are you sponsoring to achieve these ends? Are you serious about these goals?
3/
Mike Masnick ✅
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •the only one misrepresenting stuff is you, unfortunately. Bluesky has done a ton of stuff to enable actual decentralization, all of which we're starting to see come into effect as we speak and all you guys do is lie about it.
But you still ignore my point. If we (properly) counted Threads as part of the fediverse, would that make the fediverse less decentralized?
Answer please.
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Mike Masnick ✅ • • •@mmasnick
@ricci did answer your question very specifically here:
discuss.systems/@ricci/1151712…
There was also more in depth discussion of the issue. It may be that you are not seeing the entire thread across the bridge.
Rob Ricci
2025-09-08 23:19:57
Rob Ricci
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Mike Masnick ✅
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •No @ricci is making a different (totally valid!) point. I am saying IF he included Threads, would you then say that Mastodon is less decentralized?
That's the only question I am asking. If your answer is yes, I would be confused. If your answer is no, you are admitting that this is not a measure of decentralization.
Which is it?
Rob Ricci
in reply to Mike Masnick ✅ • • •I think a better question here, Mike is *if* Threads had 400M users who were active on the fediverse, would the fediverse be more centralized?
I would say yes.
Rob Ricci
in reply to Rob Ricci • • •Folker
in reply to Rob Ricci • • •a) #mastodon is #decentralized,
b) #bluesky as being controlled by a single company is completely centralized, and
c) #atmosphere as being dominated by #bluesky is practically centralized.
Rob Ricci
in reply to Folker • • •Centralization is not binary the way you're presenting it here.
Let's say we have a 400M-user Threads and a 1M-user Mastodon. If they defederate or Threads dies, Mastodon users loose access to 99.8% of the people they could communicate with. Ouch. But Mastodonians still have 1M people in their network so maybe it'll survive. Definitely not certain, though, that's a big cut. That's why I say a version of the Fediverse with 400M actual federated Threads users would be quite centralized.
Now, people on one side may not actually give a shit about communicating with people on the other side. Fine, the people in both networks are not gaining a lot from federation. This seems to be more or less the status of most of the Fediverse and Threads, and why I think the correct thing to do is count the number of Threads users who have actually turned on federation, not the rest of them. If they defederate (as a lot of the Fediverse has done already), not a lot of connections are cut. This is why the existence of Threads does not increase the centralization the Fediverse today. This could, of course, change. This is why one should *keep* counting the number of Threads users who federate.
Now, let's do this for Bluesky and Blacksky (in its role as a PDS, appview, and maybe soon relay). If, today, they split (say, the Bluesky relay stops talking to the Blacksky PDS and appview) or Bluesky dies, the 718 people on the BlackSky PDS lose access to the 38M people on the Bluesky PDSes: 99.999% of the people in the network. Again, maybe people on Blacksky could care less about people on Bluesky. But, given the even vaster difference in size, I'd wager that Blacksky users are pretty strongly interconnected with Bluesky users. And again, maybe this changes; in the week I've been watching, the number of users on the Blacksky PDS has gone up by about 200. Maybe it continues to grow and gets a lot bigger, that would change the dynamic. So again, this is why it's worth measuring and watching.
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Rob Ricci • • •Rob Ricci
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Rob Ricci
in reply to Rob Ricci • • •now with actual link:
codeberg.org/ricci/are-we-dece…
are-we-decentralized-yet/BIndex.md at main
Codeberg.orgMastodon Migration
in reply to Rob Ricci • • •Folker
in reply to Rob Ricci • • •I didn't present it binary - I deliberately chose the words "completely centralized" versus "practically centralized" versus "decentralized".
And while of course centralization is not binary, and there are many discussions about details and about the future, we should not muddle the water and forget the overall big picture that for all practical purposes today bluesky is centralized and mastodon is decentralized.
Rob Ricci
in reply to Folker • • •Here's an illustration of the difference (in agreement with your basic point).
Threads is currently blocked by servers representing 31% of Fediverse MAU and muted by another 2.5%. (Data from fedipact.veganism.social/ )
That's the independent decisions of 3,280 instances. Several thousand others chose to federate.
Let's say the atmosphere had the same decision to make. One organization's decision re: whether or not Thread's PDSes on their relay would affect >99% of atmosphere users.
Mike will probably say that Bluesky might fragment, with people who don't like its decision, whichever way it goes, moving to services that make a different decision. Yes, it might. And they would get to take their data with them, which is great, and they can still communicate with the people who stay behind.
But I gotta say, these seem to me like very different decision making processes with respect to whether power is held centrally or distributed to independent actors.
#Fedipact - The instances blocking Zuckerberg's Threads.net
fedipact.veganism.socialFolker
in reply to Rob Ricci • • •To add, I think the credible exit argument falls apart in reality anyway. See reality check Mississippi blocking: Many people on bluesky seem to not like the decision, but at the same time I have seen nobody acting on it and moving to services that make a different decision.
BTW, using a different analysis only 7% of the fediverse seem to be known to block #threads, down from 9% last year, see also mastodon.social/@folkerschamel….
Folker
2023-12-20 13:15:22
Rob Ricci
in reply to Folker • • •Interesting post, thanks. I didn't cross-check the fedipact data against another source, that's probably part of our discrepancy, but the data from them does add up to about 900k MAU, so I don't know why it's such a big discrepancy. Anyway, we agree that this represents highly-decentralized decision making in action, right?
I think I'm more optimistic about credible exit than you are, part of the goal is not just that people will move, but that it will discourage individual platforms from taking actions that will piss users off. That said, I think it absolutely does not *guarantee* decentralization or user-positive behavior. The web search market has great credible exit, yet Google is staying around 90% (depending on source) even while making a lot of people quite angry about various things.
Folker
in reply to Rob Ricci • • •Yes, agreed that fediblock is a text book example how decentralization works well in practice.
Well, then #bluesky credible exit is the same as decentralization support of #atproto: cool tech, nice theory, clever marketing trick, but largely irrelevant in reality. Btw, #twitter has a credible exit too: just export your data and import it into something new.😉
PS: any chance of an explanation of
mastodon.social/@folkerschamel… ?
Folker (@folkerschamel@mastodon.social)
MastodonRob Ricci
in reply to Folker • • •I think the contention here is that Mastodon GMBH is to the Fediverse as Bluesky PBC is to the Atmosphere: both individual companies develop software, run services with users, and participate in a larger ecosystem that they don't control
. Each company can be called a "central" entity, and the whole can be said to contain parts that are outside that center. This is the point that I understand Mike to be making that he thinks you are missing or confused about.At some level, this is correct. But I think this is a very shallow reading. If you look at the actual structure of these networks, they are very different. A large majority of the Fediverse is not subject to Mastodon GMBH's operational decisions (TOS, federation decisions, etc. ). There are other projects that rival the software produced by Mastodon GMBH in both scope and userbase. The pressures that shape the Fediverse are much larger *outside* of Mastodon GMBH that the ones that come from the company. There are tens of thousands of people in the Fediverse who, for better or worse, are social network administrators. Decisions are made by a huge set of people. atproto envisions a world where these things *could* happen - but so far as I know none of them are true of it today.
I think it is a major mistake to gloss over these differences.
I think we will all concede that Bluesky does currently have significant control over the larger ecosystem through its control over atproto, but I am willing to give them the assumption of good faith in terms of handing off that control; they've started, and I assume they will complete the process.reshared this
Jürgen Hubert reshared this.
Rob Ricci
in reply to Rob Ricci • • •In terms of "credible exit" Bluesky has made some moderation decisions in the last day that have made a set of people mad and (anecdotally) as I result I just saw a of people move to the fediverse from there, so maybe that is the future of credible exit. 😀
They can still bridge, and fed.brid.gy currently hosts more than half of the accounts on the Atmosphere that are on non-Bluesky PDSes.
[Edit: Some hard data shows that Blacksky users shot up by 300 that day, which is more compelling than my anecdote.]
Folker
in reply to Rob Ricci • • •Mastodon Migration
in reply to Folker • • •Folker
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Mastodon Migration
in reply to Folker • • •Rob Ricci
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Folker
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Rob Ricci
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Mike Masnick ✅
in reply to Folker • • •Rob Ricci
in reply to Mike Masnick ✅ • • •Mastodon Migration
in reply to Rob Ricci • • •Rob Ricci
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Mastodon Migration
in reply to Rob Ricci • • •Not endorsing point b, just pointing out it references Bluesky and not AT Protocol. In general the conflation of the two leads to a lot of confusion and ambiguous statements. Think that it is much more useful to look at the overall networks and the relative percentage ownership of the various distributed components, as the Rob Ricci analysis does.
1/
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Mike Masnick seems to suggest that it is not the current state of distributed ownership, but some measure of the ease of people moving to other independent nodes on the network. It is hard to see how any metrics could capture this, since it would necessarily involve the creation and rapid expansion of very significant server resources that do not currently exist. This just doesn't seem feasible.
2/
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •So, returning to Rob Ricci's point that the current measure, while not dispositive on the subject of potential decentralizability is a useful thing to know. And further, that it can give insight into the ability of the independent network resources to respond to a 'mass migration' event.
3/
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Question for Rob... Thinking about this a little more, and wondering what the sensitivity of the metrics is to changes in the distribution. For example, let's hypothesized Bluesky PBC shrinks on a percentage basis to 70% of total AT Protocol users, and 10 other independent options evolve to handle 25% with 5% spread across another 100. What would the needle look like?
4/
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •The reason for asking is this might capture the decentralizability capability that Mike is talking about. Sure the user are still predominantly on Bluesky PBC, but viable options exist that could scale if need be.
5/
Rob Ricci
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Interesting question, it might be cool to build a little tool that makes it easy for people to explore questions like this for themselves. Could be fun. For some kinds of people (I am that kinds of people)
The HHI for such a configuration would come out to 4963, so in terms of the needle, just about halfway.
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Rob Ricci • • •This seems important. The conclusion being, consistent with Mike's thesis, that in order for a network to be meaningfully decentralized, it does not have to be broadly distributed. However, the potential needs to be demonstrated in statistically meaningful real world deployments.
It will be interesting to track the needle as things evolve. Seems establishing an initial decentralized goal of "about halfway" is a good target.
Folker
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Personally I think decentralization is not enough. I I'm more interested in full interoperability.
I would prefer a world where #fediverse, #mastodon, #bluesky, #threads etc. seamlessly interoperate instead of being isolated islands.
I don't see a technical reason why this is not possible. #activitypub support of #threads and @bsky.brid.gy are a good start, but far from real interoperability in practice.
Rob Ricci
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •I'm not too worried about *potential* for *infrastructure* to scale: at a technical level we've been putting a lot of engineering resources into that sort of thing for a long time now, and what I've seen of the various atproto implementations suggests to me that it's reasonable to believe they can be operated at scale by groups other than bluesky-the-company.
Money I'm not super worried about either. Sure anyone wanting to absorb a mass migration would need to get a bunch of money quickly, but we have existence proof that the "please donate to your server" model, while it has its flaws, is remarkably stable.
But the human capital, that's the hard part. If all of the knowledge and hard-won experience about how to actually run a social network is locked up in one organization, or a few, that takes a long time to build up. The distribution across *some* measure of independent services is a proxy for how centralized or distributed that human capital is. This is why I really wish I could get data re: labelers and feed generators, as that's one place where I do think Bluesky is probably building up some distributed expertise.
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Rob Ricci • • •Agree with all this. We don't really need to isolate the different components of what basically comes down to inertia.
Edit: Which is also why getting things spun up from rest is very different from accelerating them once they are up and spinning.
Rob Ricci
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •To continue to try to make the strongest argument I can think of on the Bluesky side here: Bluesky itself scaled up successfully and fairly rapidly; it did a good job absorbing the waves of people moving off Twitter in the wave of some of the particularly grievous conduct there.
But I think to resist measuring and to place actual exercise of user control in the future is to sleepwalk into monopoly. Yes, right now, there are indeed some notable exercises of that control going on, with Blacksky being particularly notable. This is exactly why this is a good time to start tracking data. Stories are powerful (Mike's conversation with Rudy on the Techdirt podcast is great if you haven't heard it) and they're best when *also* backed up with qualitative data.
SpaceLifeForm
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Old stuff::
techdirt.com/2019/08/28/protoc…
Protocols, Not Platforms: A Technological Approach to Free Speech
TechdirtMike Masnick ✅
in reply to Rob Ricci • • •Rob Ricci
in reply to Mike Masnick ✅ • • •Mastodon Migration
in reply to Rob Ricci • • •Folker
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Mastodon Migration
in reply to Mike Masnick ✅ • • •It is good to hear that Bluesky has done a ton of stuff to enable decentralization. Can you elaborate on these measures?
Seems like @ricci arewedecentralizedyet.online/ analytics are a good yardstick by which to measure the success of these measures?
And while the data makes clear the network is not decentralized yet, it also illustrates that it is decentralizable and is useful in measuring progress toward this goal.
Are We Decentralized Yet?
arewedecentralizedyet.onlineMastodon Migration
in reply to Mike Masnick ✅ • • •There is also a good discussion that addressing the subject in this thread:
liberal.city/@wjmaggos/1151649…
And also in this thread hachyderm.io/@thisismissem/115… starting here mastodon.online/@mastodonmigra…
As you reference here: bsky.app/profile/did:plc:cak4k… there are lots of great projects on AT Protocol. The matter boils down to what specificxally is Bluesky PBC doing to promote meaning decentralization and by what metrics do you judge success?
william.maggos
2025-09-07 20:53:39
Rob Ricci
in reply to Mike Masnick ✅ • • •Hi, creator of the chart here. I'm disappointed to see people using it as a way to try to dunk on or bully various protocols.
@mastodonmigration and @folkerschamel if you're going to share the screenshot I'd appreciate if you'd update it to the latest version, which is slightly clearer that the gauge is showing the HHI, a measure from economics that captures market concentration - not just users on the biggest servers, as are in the table. It also now has git forges as well to show that the point is to compare many forms of decentralized networks (I'm working on getting data for more); it's not just there to dunk on atproto. The heading that you cut off also (tries) to make it clear that it's showing user data, eg. it's not attempting to show things like moderation or feeds, where Bluesky likely has more diversity.
Mike, I'm working on getting Threads data in here; Meta doesn't make that data available via the standard APIs so it's not in my data sources. The most recent estimate I can find for the number of Threads users who have opted in to the fediverse is around 25k-50k as of Dec 2024: fediversereport.com/why-is-met… . So while I do want to get it in here for completeness, Threads doesn't really move the needle.
I do want criticism of this data, the way that it's presented, and other ways I can show the decentralization that does exist in the deployment of the AT Protocol ecosystem. I've made several changes in response to feedback, some of it from Bluesky team members - in fact creating this dashboard in the first place and the way I'm getting ATProto data was the idea of a Bluesky team member. (He didn't suggest the specific use of HHI, however)
But that said, this specific criticism is off-base: if we add the number of Threads users who are actually fediverse users, nothing changes. If we were to add in the 400 MAU that Threads claims to have, but who are not fediverse users, that would be kind of like asking why we didn't put Facebook on the AT Protocol side: not a meaningful thing to do. And, if, hypothetically, all those 400 Threads users *were* fediverse users, that would, in fact, centralize a *lot* of power in Meta's hands - not all of it, but a ton. We all know how networks work. This is one reason (the other being the, you know, everything, about Meta) that fediverse folks were quite worried about Thread's entrance.
My goal in building this thing is so that we can watch the deployments, nothing more nothing less. Hopefully, blacksky grows and we see that reflected in the Atmosphere side. I've seen your recent post about a bunch of AT Protocol development that is not from Bluesky. Great. The point of this chart is to watch that grow. There are plenty of anecdotes, those are good and necessary. Data is part of the story too, and that's what I'm trying to provide here.
Speaking of which, I would very much like to get data from Bluesky regarding the use of third-party feeds and moderation tools. As far as I can tell, I can only get this from the Appview, and I can't find any indication it's exposed yet. I hope that you understand that I'm trying to provide a valuable data source here, and if you do, I'd appreciate if you could put me in touch with the right person to ask about this.
And finally, thanks for One Billion Users, I had a great game with my spouse last night 😀
Why is Meta adding fediverse interoperability to Threads?
fediversereport.comMastodon Migration
in reply to Rob Ricci • • •Happy to use the most up to date version in any future references to the site, and will be sure not to remove any headers. Did not realize it mattered, but will certainly abide by your wishes.
The purpose in directing people to this is to establish an honest factual basis for discussion, and take exception to the characterization of "dunking" or "bullying".
1/
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •AT Protocol has the potential to be a decentralized network. Your graph is one good way to measure progress toward this goal.
It does not serve the objective of building out the decentralized network to misrepresent its current state.
Pushing back on these claims should be a concern common to all who want AT Protocol to actually achieve its potential.
2/
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •What is confounding is why there is not more agitation within the AT Protocol community for actually addressing the overwhelming dominance of Bluesky PBC.
Why is there not more pressure to facilitate the kind of distributed peer to peer network they so aggressively market?
Hopefully, your graph will inspire real progress to these ends by making the goal more clear and tangible.
3/
Rob Ricci
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •I mean, there is *some* agitation, blacksky is both friendly to the ecosystem and has some problems with bluesky.
Really though I think there is not more agitation because, for now, bluesky the company is doing a mostly okay job. Being decentralized is not the goal, it's the means to the goal (free and open social networking) and it's just unlikely that people will get too upset when the company isn't *currently* much of an impediment to it. I don't find it too surprising.
So: will the kinds of actions that inspired blacksky and user-hostile stuff like the Mississippi block start some of that agitation? Or are we at the start of a boil-the-frog situation, and as the company makes increasingly-harder decisions and the VCs start asking for their profits, they all stay put? That's what I want to watch, with data and not just stories here and there.
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Rob Ricci • • •Granted that as of now it seems like Bluesky is trying and mostly succeeding in being a counterweight to X and Threads. But, as you a certainly aware, this is only because of the current management priorities. Should this change, there is no systemic protection.
However, and this is the rub, they disingenuously market that those protections are in place.
Hopefully, efforts such as yours will awaken the community to this vulnerability, and help inspire real change.
Folker
in reply to Rob Ricci • • •Thanks a lot for this great chart!
I think it is a very useful tool for showing the current status as well as change over time of decentralization of various ecosystems.
I also fully support the view that it should be not misused to dunk or bully various protocols. The chart is about decentralization of ecosystems, not about technical capabilities of protocols - and both #atproto and #ActivityPub support decentralization, so that's the end of this story anyway.
Folker
in reply to Folker • • •Mastodon Migration
in reply to Folker • • •Folker
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Rob Ricci
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •ikuturso
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Folker
in reply to Folker • • •Mastodon Migration
in reply to Folker • • •The best 'simple' explanation for AT Protocol that makes some sense of the different components this document from Kuba @mackuba
mackuba.eu/2025/08/20/introduc…
1/
Introduction to AT Protocol
mackuba.euMastodon Migration
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •If you only take one mental crutch away from this opus it might be this really helpful analogy:
"The metaphor that’s often used to describe these relationship is that PDSes are like websites which publish some blog posts, and relays & AppViews are like search engines which crawl and index the web, and then let you look up results in them. In most cases, a website should be indexed and visible in all/most available search engines."
2/
Folker
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Mastodon Migration
in reply to Folker • • •@mackuba
Yes. But there are independent relays and AppViews too. At least a few of them. Blacksky reportedly has a relay and is working on their own AppView. It is not clear how much traffic these can handle.
There is one other component, the DID database. Kind of the central phone book, that is still managed by Bluesky, but they say they want to spin it out to a non-profit. This is another good measure of how serious they are about letting go of control of AT Protocol.
Folker
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Mastodon Migration
in reply to Folker • • •Folker
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Mastodon Migration
in reply to Folker • • •@mackuba
Concur. And that's why good honest analytics are important. It might give users leverage to advocate for making the reality line up with their claims.
Rob Ricci
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Rob Ricci
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Yeah I've heard this search engine metaphor before as well, and I think it's revealing in a way that maybe it's not intended to be.
Are we all happy with the dominance that Google has over web search? Yes, there are other web search engines (I happen to use one) and we are not forced by the *protocols* to use Google. Credible exit is extremely simple for web search: just go to duckduckgo.com or bing.com or kagi.com or ... And yet, because of the market power that has been centralized in Google, they are still free to enshittify even though it's easier to use a different search engine than it is to migrate PDSes or move instances in the fediverse. This is the fear that I have: just because the protocol allows you freedom of movement, and some people do opt out of the monopolist, this does not guarantee you an ecosystem that is free from the harms of the monopolist.
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Rob Ricci • • •Right. We will see if they are serious about making it a truly open standard and are intent upon fostering independent adoption of the standard insuring they are not the sole dominant enterprise using it. This is hard to do is because there are always people inside the company who view these independent adopters as competitors and since they have the lock on the information, they have an unfair advantage. It takes real leadership to fight this.
1/
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •What they really should to do, at the earliest possible moment, is spin it all out to an independent standards body effort where they do not have any proprietary advantage. Then enforce internally that they follow the standard and do not have their own version. (This is kind of where Mastodon extensions to ActivityPub seems dicey.)
For example making good on their pledge to spin out the DID database would speak volumes.
2/
Rob Ricci
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •they have in fact just started the process of letting go of the standard, so good for them:
datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bofre…
Authenticated Transfer
datatracker.ietf.orgKuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Mastodon Migration
in reply to Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋 • • •Sorry. Will edit the posts.
Edit: Done. Again apologies. Will be more careful in the future. Unfortunately it was the first one to come up.
Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋
in reply to Kuba Suder • @mackuba.eu on 🦋 • • •Folker
in reply to Folker • • •One additional note about "dunking": While the chart obviously does not "dunk" on protocols, on the other hand it effectively "dunks" on the misconception or misrepresentation that a protocol supporting decentralization automatically means decentralization of the ecosystem - which I think is essential to distinguish.
Even if you intended the tool to only be descriptive, you cannot avoid it being used for the purpose of encouraging decentralization of ecosystems.🙂
Folker
in reply to Folker • • •One specific change proposal: clarify that #fediverse excludes #threads. E.g. by an asterisk.
This won't stop the discussions about whether #threads should be considered as part of the #fediverse or not.😉 And won't stop the uncertainty about how many #threads users have opted in federating.
But it would clarify what the numbers and the chart mean.
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Folker • • •Rob Ricci
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Mastodon Migration
in reply to Rob Ricci • • •Rob Ricci
in reply to Folker • • •Well, I fully expect that at some point (soon, likely) someone will put together a 'packaged' atmosphere instance that installs all of this stuff together as a way to bring up most of the stack yourself; much in the same way that most of us are blissfully ignorant of the databases, work queues, etc. that underlie our Mastodon (or other) instances, it 'just' some engineering work to hide all that stuff inside one install, if your goal is to have one self-hosted thing that acts more like a fediverse instance.
I will also say, to be fair, that on the fediverse, it can be confusing to understand that you might not see all of the replies, likes, boosts, etc. of a post due to the way federation works. I think most of us here are quite used to this, but there are also things here that have direct impact on what we see and don't see as well.
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Rob Ricci • • •Hope you are right about a near term turnkey AT Protocol installation package. And you are absolutely right about ActivityPub deficiencies.
For instance, have often thought that more skinning/configuration options permitting instances to be uniquely branded and "powered by Mastodon" would be a killer feature.
Rob Ricci
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Rob Ricci
in reply to Folker • • •If this was not your intention, I would like to suggest then that some of your posts along the lines of "I don't understand this but it looks bad for you" and your ostrich-burying-its-head meme may have been a bit off the mark, then. I don't think they advanced the conversation.
@mastodonmigration
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Rob Ricci • • •OCTADE
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •@mmasnick.bsky.social@bsky.brid.gy
Are you arguing over two kinds of toilets? One flushes and distributes the payload through a vast sewer system. The other is a latrine pit under a cardboard outhouse. Decentralized vs. centralized 101.
Folker
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •Mike Masnick
in reply to Folker • • •Folker
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •Well, I don't see it as nitpicking...
Nobody was questioning the architecture of #twitter either as long as everybody was happy with their governance... We should do better this time.
Mike Masnick
in reply to Folker • • •Mastodon Migration
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •@folkerschamel
Using caps and issuing admonishments does not make your argument stronger.
What he said is true. It may be a bad law, but the for all intents and purposes centralized Bluesky network is more vulnerable to it.
Folker
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •@Gargron
Yes, but my point is that the consequences for the users are much worse for #bluesky users because of lack of decentralization mastodon.social/@folkerschamel…
A bad law does not eliminate the difference between effectively centralized and decentralized social networks.
Folker (@folkerschamel@mastodon.social)
MastodonAaron Mills 🏳️⚧️
in reply to Folker • • •Folker
in reply to Aaron Mills 🏳️⚧️ • • •Theoretically yes, but in practice basically all #atproto users depend on #bluesky and are affected by the block without having the technical expertise or willingness to circumvent it. On the other hand #fediverse users are distributed over many #mastodon instances making their own decisions.
#activitypub and #atproto both support decentralization, but in practice #mastodon is decentralized, #bluesky is centralized.
Folker
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •@Gargron @bsky.app
I think @Gargron is right.
I think it is an insincere excuse to imply that most users can host their own views or use such other views.
And I think it is a straw man to imply that many instances potentially making similar decisions is remotely the same as one company making a central decision and forcing it on everyone.
Mike Masnick
in reply to Folker • • •Folker
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •@Gargron @bsky.app
I'm not implying that.
My point is: Decentralzation gives real choices to all the instances. For example, some instance can decide to do the same as Blueskye and cut off Mississippi, others could also decide for individual age verification - not to say that I suggest that, but they have that option.
Central decisions don't allow that. In practice every user of bluesky is forced to accept the central decision of bluesky.
Folker
in reply to Folker • • •Mike Masnick
in reply to Folker • • •Folker
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •@Gargron @bsky.app
I think I gave a very specific argument why it is not meaningless.
I would respect an argument along the line "well, I know that the #atproto fediverse / mastodon is much better regarding #decentralization than #bluesky, but overall #bluesky is still much better because of x y z", but I smells disingenuous to me to claim that #bluesky is as decentralized as #mastodon.
Mike Masnick
in reply to Folker • • •Folker
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •@Gargron @bsky.app
Social media means that the topic of an thread can expand 😉 - in this case which architecture is fundamentally better. I don't see it as a ideological discussion, but having large real-world consequences. As we can experience live right now with the Mississippi situation. I can definitely tell you that there won't be a central decision for all #fediverse instances to block all Mississippi users.🙂
Mike Masnick
in reply to Folker • • •Folker
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •@Gargron @bsky.app
I think it's claim that the current consequences for #bluesky users and #mastodon users are the same is denying reality. But I believe this discussion landed in a non-constructive dead end.
To switch topic to an exciting aspect: I'm excited that bidgy works much better than I expected. It's still a long way, but it gives me hope that one day we will truly break down the walls between all platform and protocol silos.
Mike Masnick
in reply to Folker • • •Folker
in reply to Mike Masnick • • •@Gargron @bsky.app That's not my argument, see mastodon.social/@folkerschamel….
Folker
2025-08-23 22:14:49
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Folker • • •Folker
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Ben Mayne
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •schratze
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •patricus
in reply to Eugen Rochko • • •I would rather go to a censored platform than one that stil has a lot of accessibility bugs.
Anuj Ahooja
Unknown parent • • •That's not how ATProto works, but yes - there are ATProto constructs that enable folks from Mississippi to continue interacting with the network in the same way an ActivityPub server can.
@Gargron @jack @laurenshof @jsit @benroyce
jack
Unknown parent • • •Anuj Ahooja
Unknown parent • • •Bluesky itself is not "a server", that is not how the protocol it's built on works
@jack @Gargron @laurenshof @jsit
Deb Nam-Krane
in reply to jack • • •