• einkorn@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    226
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    13 days ago

    Bluesky, the decentralized social network […]

    Were only one instance exist or did I miss something?

    • InfiniteHench@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      141
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      13 days ago

      As I understand it, the protocol has the ability to decentralize built in. But the technical requirements are prohibitively high to the point only large businesses or corps could afford to do it. I also believe (someone correct me) the company hasn’t switched on the functionality yet.

      • Drunemeton@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        54
        ·
        13 days ago

        Last heard (a few months ago) the cost is in storage. The protocol isn’t too complicated now, but it generates a shit ton of data, and IIRC you need a minimum of 3 copies.

        • mac@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          24
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          13 days ago

          Storage is cheap whwn it comes to webhosting and 3 replicas is honestly not much when it comes to enterprise standards. I think cloud storage providers like backblaze keep something like 9 copies of data across different mediums

      • noodlejetski@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        32
        ·
        13 days ago

        my mom has always told me that I had the potential to work at NASA. but the requirements are prohibitively high

      • Natanael@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        12 days ago

        Maybe you remember PDS federation not being open for a while, but it’s open now.

        Running a public appview can be very expensive, but they’re working on making it cheaper to run one with a limited scope.

      • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        13 days ago

        The biggest thing is that you need to be manually authorized by them for federation. They will only ever federate with servers that arent serious enough competition to lead to democratization of the overall network.

        • Natanael@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          12 days ago

          No, PDS federation is fully open now.

          They’re also actively supporting development of 3rd party appviews and relays.

          • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            12 days ago

            The power dynamic is still 1000000:1 they can do whatever they want and you will have to follow. If they defederate you, there is no value in your self hosted instance.

            • Natanael@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              12 days ago

              Partially - something running independent infrastructure like Whitewind (blogging on atproto) will still work just like before (it’s easier for them to run it independently because you don’t need a full network view, just pull in the posts from the user’s PDS for standalone display)

              When the work to make appviews easier to run makes it more practical this will be less of a risk.

    • Mike@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      13 days ago

      I think their initial selling point was that Eventually©®™ Bluesky would federate with the rest of the Fediverse.

      Is anybody really surprised that a social media corporation didn’t make it their utmost priority to allow their userbase to connect out of their proprietary platform?

      • Natanael@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        12 days ago

        They never said they’d do so natively with other protocols - but they support Bridgy, so you already can do that.

        • Mike@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          12 days ago

          Interesting how other instances of the fediverse have no such restrictions. It’s almost as if they want to make it as difficult as possible so that people just don’t federate.

          • Natanael@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            12 days ago

            There’s literally no restrictions other than simple rate limiting, which you can ask for exceptions for.

            I don’t know a Mastodon/lemmy server which wouldn’t rate limit new peers

    • massi1008@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      13 days ago

      You can easily host your own instance with a simple docker stack.

      I dont know of any public instances except the main but I also havent searched.