Post
Replies:
15
Re: Would you like to see full default interoperability between #ATproto and #ActivityPub without a bridge?
@evan@cosocial.ca @wjmaggos@liberal.city clearly what we need is one final protocol to rule them all /s
@evan @wjmaggos you're making a category error, Evan.
People who aren't us don't give even the tiniest shits about which protocols they're using. 5G phones happily talk to 2G phones over SS7, and the only thing anyone knows about "5G" is that it's "fast" – and they don't even know what that means.
You just said approx. "that doesn't make any sense; it's like saying that you want NG-RAN and SS7 to be mutually intelligible" and people will care about as much as someone who literally says that.
@blaine @wjmaggos The first question asked by the poll is "Would you like to see full default interoperability between #ATproto and #ActivityPub without a bridge?"
The second question is "what's preventing this".
but that assumes there won't be any appreciable experiential diff. at this point, I think there will be. I don't expect anything like fully independent news or government servers on AT.
see @mondoweiss trying to use AT and consider pressure from Israel on most relays. their ability to get a critical story to go viral would be crushed.
arguing over protocols should be focused on why we care about decentralization. which model will be most likely to get us the future we want.
@evan @wjmaggos (i.e. not at all)
It makes plenty sense to make BlueSky and Mastodon interoperable, even if it involves protocol-level translation. Doing so is, frankly, easy, and much easier than the very common approach of translating between Spanish and Chinese (which is what we normally do to communicate instead of inventing a Spanish/Chinese pidgin, which is also a thing humans do!).
@evan @blaine @wjmaggos One possible problem with that is that even if that happened, this would mean that when one random person follows you from Bluesky, all your future posts would become visible in the open on a public website and the global firehose and to the 30M+ Bluesky users. From what I know about Mastodon users, a lot of them would probably not like that… (since a lot of them very loudly objected specifically to that when Snarfed wanted Bridgy to work this way at first).
@evan @wjmaggos where the real "human-level" challenge is is that e.g. Mastodon and BlueSky are different, culturally, and so are "the Fediverse" and "Truth Social" and any combination of separate servers that we can imagine, or even two random servers *within* the Mastodon-running-Fediverse. Mastodon and Bluesky are way more similar than Pixelfed, and it makes much less sense to federate Pixelfed and Mastodon than it does Mastodon and Bluesky, because they serve different social purposes.
@evan @wjmaggos you're making a category error, Evan.
People who aren't us don't give even the tiniest shits about which protocols they're using. 5G phones happily talk to 2G phones over SS7, and the only thing anyone knows about "5G" is that it's "fast" – and they don't even know what that means.
You just said approx. "that doesn't make any sense; it's like saying that you want NG-RAN and SS7 to be mutually intelligible" and people will care about as much as someone who literally says that.
ok. so would the closest to this be getting apps to do the bridging?
of course I used to ask both threads and bluesky to do this, until my Instagram account got suspended. they never told me why but I assume they considered me spam. bluesky marks me as spam sometimes.
