This is demonstrably not fantasy as the example case is a fully productionized network (Bluesky and the rest of AT-net) that’s having real-world impact to the point where it’s under threat from several authoritarian states.
This is demonstrably not fantasy as the example case is a fully productionized network (Bluesky and the rest of AT-net) that’s having real-world impact to the point where it’s under threat from several authoritarian states.
It has?
Don't get me wrong, I'm in the tech industry and generally more online then likely 95% of the population, but ime ... Nobody even knows what bluesky is?
(They also don't know what X is, though they DO know what Twitter is)
And even more niche products like mostodon, the fediverse altogether etc are entirely unknown to most of the tech industry too.
Sounds like a feature. I like some self-selection bias, it might have character. Maybe a little less global competition for my attention.
You must live in a different tech industry than I do. They might not be using it, but most know about it.
Sometimes tech leads the world, however unwillingly, to better outcomes.
Tech is downstream of culture. Seems that smart people keep getting duped by this idea.
For example Twitter and Facebook didn’t result in a bunch of Democracies springing up after the Arab Spring, it resulted in the complete opposite. Tech simply amplifies the culture that was already there.
Bluesky is not decentralized. Building a centralized system on top of a protocol that can also theoretically support decentralized systems does not make it decentralized. https://arewedecentralizedyet.online/
Honestly, that’s not been my experience. Granted the UK is less authoritarian than most. But the general attitude is people who care don’t even use Bluesky and those that don’t continue to use Meta services because why wouldn’t they if they don’t care.
I know the topic of mental health and social media is different from the topic of independence vs the monolithic web. But that doesn’t mean that there isn’t significant overlap in terms of those who are willing to boycott Meta for privacy reasons are also the kinds of people who likely dislike social media for other societal reasons too.
> the point where it’s under threat from several authoritarian states.
This is a victim fantasy, and if being under intense attack from the state meant you were rebelling against the authoritarian system, then you would be capping for Parler, Gab, X and Tiktok. Bluesky, however, is only under attack from its own users, who are authoritarian trolls. At least the management seem to be getting sick of them, because it is actively inhibiting their growth* that they've been used as a base for the angriest, most entitled, least interesting people on the planet. It must be hell trying to manage a site filled with people demanding to speak to the manager.
It is also just a centralized twitter clone backed by VC looking for a return; not a revolution.
[*] Of course, it was their strategy to cater to that group because of all the free advertising they'd get from the media. But it had and has nothing to do with Dorsey's hopeful redemption arc, which was only about decentralization (i.e. not having speech under the control of people like him) and resilience. Bluesky was supposed to be bittorrent.
Wasn’t BlueSky kinda ruined by the whole leftist Twitter exodus while simultaneously being fawned over and settled by Reddity political types? Maybe I’m missing something but I’ve tried to use it a few times and it just feels like another internet echo chamber silo (even if that’s due to user self-isolation and not the underlying tech).