Could someone please explain to me whether Bluesky is decentralized?

[cwebber@social.coop]

@SuperDicq ok thanks, it's too bad there can't be a source though, I thought it was open source

[cwebber@social.coop]

@per_sonne is crayola decentralized though

[eblu@wetdry.world]

@cwebber it doesn't use activitypub so it isn't decentralized. this is because activitypub is clearly the only decentralized social networking protocol that has been fully and completely adopted by several applications like mastodon, and billionaires cannot run mastodon unlike bluesky's expensive "relays" that the fediverse doesn't have

[cwebber@social.coop]

@eblu billionaire-proof

[slothrop@chaos.social]

@cwebber It's a quantum thing. It's decentralized, until you observe it closely. Then it isn't.

[Gæst]

@cwebber somewhat, but if bluesky the company goes down the network collapses

you can store your own data on your server

but bluesky owns:
- the main appview
- the main moderation service (which is hardcoded into their appview and can just disappear your account from everyone else)
- the main relay (AFAIK there are no real alternatives, they can also ban you on this level if you run your own data server)
- the service storing information about user IDs (DID:PLC, IIUC if this ever goes down most accounts are immediately gone)

[Gæst]

@cwebber this is very different from Fedi, here if mastodon.social suddenly disappeared, the rest of the network would go on as normal

[Gæst]

@cwebber also running your own data server is a clusterfuck.

but I still did it

[Gæst]

@cwebber I just realized you wrote ActivityPub

I'm too autistic for this shit ​​

[cwebber@social.coop]

@lunareclipse In all seriousness I am glad when people have actually tried to run the infrastructure

[Gæst]

@lunareclipse @cwebber I just wanted to chime in to say that at the very least it was an informative answer.

[Gæst]

@cwebber from what I read it can be decentralised, in the sense that if you really try hard, you'd be able to host your own instance, but it will never be peer-to-peer, so the traffic will always go through the bluesky central hub.

I am not really a technical guy so I might misunderstood it, so I am looking forward to read the replies too.

[elplatt@greatjustice.net]

@cwebber Did they buy a bunch of centralization offsets? Maybe there's a mesh network of raspberry pis planted in a rainforest somewhere?

[Gæst]

@cwebber i found this diagram extremely intuitive, may be helpful to you as well!

[Gæst]

@cwebber IIRC it is decentralized but not as cool as to allow you to add your own instance.

[williampietri@sfba.social]

@cwebber You mean decent-ralized, like making them decent? I hear Bluesky is making use of AI moderation plus libertarian market incentives, so I'm sure they're much more decent than this place.

[elplatt@greatjustice.net]

@cwebber OK, hear me out... maybe it's controlled by a single entity, but that entity could have some kind of "offering" to sell shares of the company to the "public". Like, anyone could buy one! Then, naturally, the VCs will celebrate by purchasing billions of slices of avocado toast and lattes, and that wealth will "trickle-down" to everyone else, who will then buy their own shares. I will take my nobel prize in economics now, thank you.

[megamichelle@a2mi.social]

@cwebber

Bluesky is decentralized because it keeps all the data in de center.

[cwebber@social.coop]

@MegaMichelle blue is cold so it must help with datacenter cooling bills

[misofist@girlcock.club]

@cwebber Oooh good question! Uhhh so basically Fediverse is based on the concept of a federation, which is a form of hegemonic imperialism and therefore not decentralised.

Whereas BlueSky runs in the cloud, which is a distributed computing system and thus decentralised.

Hope this helps! Feel free to ask me if you have any more questions.