Note that accounts on both networks must follow the main bridge account to work.

  • woelkchen@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    If the BlueSky protocol offers tangible benefits over ActivityPub, the BlueSky protocol could become the basis for ActivityPub 2.0. I don’t know much about the details, though.

    • Fisch@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      The BlueSky protocol relies on central servers tho, I’m not sure if there’s much that ActivityPub can take inspiration from

      • Twoafros@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Non technical person here, I would love to hear more about how decentralized (or not decentralized) the Bluesky protocol is compared to ActivityPub

        • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 hours ago

          Here is a good blogpost about it

          https://taggart-tech.com/20241124-bluesky-questions-pt1/

          Check out this mastodon thread and associated links

          https://social.wildeboer.net/@jwildeboer/113504285308484716

          TL;DR Bluesky is not functionally federated nor decentralized, it is dubious if it ever will be and the layer of post sorting and moderation required to participate in Bluesky’s network is extremely computationally intensive and this aspect of Bluesky is NOT open source and is a proprietary black box.

          The fediverse and activity pub are the future, even if the current hype train leaving the station (…who is paying for all the free drinks on that train and why?) makes it feel otherwise in the short term.