@mcc I don't know anything about Bluesky architecture, but I love a well-crafted scathing witticism (like that bit about the microservices).
Post
Replies:
10
Boosts:
50
There's a bit in Terry Jones' "Starship Titanic" where an alien gets caught in a traffic jam on Earth, and explodes "your transportation system is so poorly designed! when more people use it, it goes *slower*! you should design it so it goes *faster*— to accommodate the extra load!".
It's funny because the former seems like the obvious, natural way transportation works, and the latter seems to require magic alien future technology.
P2P is a world where naturally the more people use it, the faster and more resilient the network becomes. Load gets distributed. Working nodes talk to each other and ignore nonworking nodes. That's how the primitive, BitTorrent era systems worked.
Bluesky somehow applied superfancy alien future technology to invent P2P traffic jams. When one node goes down, the others go down because they depended on it. Because it's a mesh of interoperating microservices by different providers, not federation.
@mcc I don't know anything about Bluesky architecture, but I love a well-crafted scathing witticism (like that bit about the microservices).
@areactis Although it's gratifying if you like my prose, it's not a witticism! It's just an actual description of Bluesky's approach. They documented the links between their microservices and let you substitute your own services that interact through the same system of JSON RPCS and websockets. This is how they intend you to use "ATProto"— it looks more like https://stream.place than Blacksky. They claim Blacksky (reimplementing ALL the services) was a goal but they DON'T make it easy…
This appears to be the explanation:
https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:w4xbfzo7kqfes5zb7r6qv3rw/post/3mjmztqnuwc2g
In Bluesky, the PDS talks to the relay talks to the appview goes to the client. Blacksky set up all four last year. But they only deployed their PDS and client, at first. They used Bluesky's relay and appview. This wasn't clearly disclosed. Then there was a censorship scare, and they switched to their own appview. But apparently they're still using Bluesky's relay. This wasn't clearly disclosed. Now relay death kills Blacksky.
@mcc When I initially raised my eyebrows at Bluesky's notion of "federation", I was told that anyone can run a relay on a small cheap computer, it's dead easy, etc.…
Now, interestingly, this means that Blacksky users can continue talking to Blacksky users. I can read Rudy's posts on Blacksky. Because that bypasses the relay. But¹ to read my *own* posts, *on a self-hosted PDS*, Bluesky is apparently required, because Blacksky relies on Bluesky's "relay" to scrape my PDS before it gets added to the Blacksky appview database.
¹ (if I'm taking Rudy's posts correctly, hardly a guarantee)
@mcc I thought with the bluesky model of federation, they *all* had dependencies on bluesky-central?
@miss_rodent Blacksky claims to have evaded that trap by duplicating literally every level of the Bluesky stack.
@mcc @miss_rodent my shallow understanding is that not only does the stack need to be fully duplicated for interoperability but there must also be a complex interconnection between the services in the stack.
All the relays need to consume and replicate the same firehouse of data
All the PDSes must accept "pull requests" from all the relays (I don't know enough about ATProto to know how the relays "register" with PDSes
All the appviews and labelers need to interact with all the relays and clients
...and so on. The ATmosphere is really kinda effed up, like they took Fediverse and put it through a pivot table to turn everything sideways. Each fedi instance implements the whole stack of serviced to manage just what is relevant to itself. ATmosphere is a composition composed of all these services that each must manage everything, everywhere, all at once, but with an open protocol.
So, the vision of atmosphere is instead of picking a "home server" you pick a "set of services"...
