68
You can now bridge Fediverse and Bluesky Accounts! (wedistribute.org)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/fediverse@lemmy.world
18 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Bridgy Fed's Bluesky integration is now in beta, and makes it possible to connect your account from the Fediverse to Bluesky, and vice versa.

There's still some quirks, and every bridged account has to opt in to it, but it's a promising moment for people that want to communicate across networks.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 13 points 2 years ago (5 children)

Come now Sean, you know that everything open about BlueSky is smoke and mirrors, considering that everything stops and starts with the indexer.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 8 points 2 years ago

    I can't tell whether this is serious or sarcastic 😅

    As far as the "global square" part of the equation is concerned: yeah, you're right! A firehose of public statuses requires indexing to work, as a basic foundational premise.

    However, there's nothing preventing someone from standing up a PDS, opting out of the firehose / big graph service, and instead leaning on federation between individual PDSes. I'm not saying it would necessarily be a common use-case, but it's definitely not impossible.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Isn't that the same issue with ActivityPub and the instances that host accounts and messages?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    No. With ActivityPub, it's totally decentralized. There's no central authority whatsoever. What there is however, is an instance that's bigger than the rest. So if we talk about Lemmy. I can access it and post and my ISP can block Lemmy World and I'd never know.

    With BlueSky, it pretends to be similar, but the reality is that everything needs to go through their central server in order to be displayed on a timeline. BlueSky is designed in such a way so that everyone does the heavy lifting, but to be seen, you need to have approval from their central server, where they can modify, insert adverts, do whatever. It's a centralised service that cosplays as decentralised. I don't understand why people keep pushing it when it's literally the same shit we all escaped from but with a new paint job.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago

    With BlueSky, it pretends to be similar, but the reality is that everything needs to go through their central server in order to be displayed on a timeline.

    They have been saying that this is an implementation detail that will change when they open up that part of their implementation. Which is nice, but until that happens I'm only lukewarm in my optimism for Bluesky and the AT protocol.

    On the other hand, every federated network has converged on a central host for the vast majority of accounts and data. That host has outsized influence over the standard used on the network and unencrypted acess to the majority of data. So I'm not sure what really matters to what extent.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent