5 ms·

From my perspective, I care about the centralization/decentralization aspect a lot, and if I'm coming into the discussion with a much better understanding of th

From my perspective, I care about the centralization/decentralization aspect a lot, and if I'm coming into the discussion with a much better understanding of the Mastodon side then _of course_ I'm going to ask about the instances--that's the vocabulary I'm going to use to try to probe for flaws and gaps. It's not necessarily that it's the instances specifically I care about, or that I'm somehow technically misguided. What I hoped to read in the article is how we approach topics like centralization, censorship, moderation, data ownership--and with a technical lens. But I feel like all I got was "here's why instances are the wrong vocabulary" without substantively talking about the part I personally care about and want to marry the technical understanding with. Maybe I just read too shallowly and need to sit with it.

danabramov 3mo ago
I see! That's a huge topic by itself since you're raising a lot of questions. Maybe this could be a different article. My aim with this one was just to clarify the network topology because it is a prerequisite to having the other discussion, and too often that prerequisite is not there. If you ask a list of specific questions, that would help a lot. I might be able to write something or reply inline here.
- JasonSage 3mo ago
  I appreciate that a lot! The article has a deliberate and explicit scope, and covers it well. I'm hoping that perhaps my personal perspective shades why "instances" comes up, or why the reaction on HN seems to include the wider scope than the article itself covers.
- Vinnl 3mo ago
  I felt the same: when folks ask this question they might not be using the correct terminology, but what they actually want to know is how many different PDSes (that's what you mean by "atproto hostings", right?) there are in a typical feed.
  - ascorbic 3mo ago
    Currently, just over 3000: https://blue.mackuba.eu/directory/pdses https://blue.mackuba.eu/directory/pdses
    - kuschku 3mo ago
      There are: - 221 with over 5 accounts - 74 with over 20 accounts - 19 with over 250 accounts - 8 with over 1000 accounts. And only a handful of those have open signups (13 with open signups have >50 users). Many of them are actually ActivityPub instances with a PDS bridge, e.g., https://join.wafrn.net/ https://join.wafrn.net/ And most of the other open signup instances are also primarily designed as their own social network, just using AT proto as a compatibility layer, e.g., https://sprk.so/ https://sprk.so/ https://haruhwa.com/ https://haruhwa.com/ (which is an invite-based, snapchat-style ephemeral social network), https://surf.social/ https://surf.social/, https://pckt.blog/ https://pckt.blog/ (a microblogging platform), aesthetic.computer (a collaborative programming/art platform) That leaves only bluesky, blacksky, eurosky, selfhosted.social, self.surf and npmx.social. Even during Facebook's heyday, the unsuccessful diaspora/friendica/gnu social/etc networks had more decentralization than that.
      - ascorbic 3mo ago
        Spark, pckt (and leaflet, tangled) etc aren't using atproto as a compatibility layer: they're fully-fledged apps built on the network.
        Vinnl 3mo ago
        Right, but I think a typical Bluesky user never sees data from there in their feeds? Don't get me wrong, I think it's pretty cool that you can run all these different apps and have them store their data on their own PDSes. And theoretically it's possible for everyone in my Bluesky feed to be on their own PDS and use different apps. But the question from a Mastodon point of view is: is that the case in practice, and if not, how likely is it that there will ever be a significant portion of non-Bluesky posts in an average microblog feed, on atproto?
- wmf 3mo ago
  I'm one of those "is it decentralized yet" people and to me the real concern is the AppView since I assume that's where censorship would be applied if it ever happens. People keep telling me about PDSes but I don't care about controlling my PDS if other people can't see my posts.
  - palata 3mo ago
    > I don't care about controlling my PDS if other people can't see my posts. Isn't that similar with Mastodon? Someone on an instance that does not federate with yours will not see your posts, and I guess someone on an instance that would censor you would not see your posts? That someone would have to change instance if they disagree with the moderation, and doing so is more painful with ActivityPub than with ATProto, right? Disclaimer: I have no skin in this game, I don't use social networks. Just interested technically :-).
    - nrabulinski 3mo ago
      It’s not more painful because there’s plenty of alternatives for activitypub instances, but only one bluesky. And you’re meant to either host your own instance, or pick one that aligns with your views and interests, such that the bulk of moderation is handled for you in terms of which instances you federate with etc.
      - chokolad 3mo ago
        > It’s not more painful because there’s plenty of alternatives for activitypub instances, but only one bluesky. No, there is not. There is blacksky, northsky, eurosky. They all display the data from your PDS.
        kuschku 3mo ago
        I'm already running my own RSS reader, Matrix server, Mastodon instance, etc. How do I run my own appview? They surely have a git repo, docker images and helm chart, right? And if I can't self-host it, surely every local computer club should be able to, as they are with all the other protocols?
cavoirom 3mo ago
I could see "Bluesky AppView" has similar semantic as Mastodon instance: network, moderation... The difference is on ATProto, when I get banned, people must switch to another "AppView instance" (could be reusing the same Bluesky AppView stack) to interact with me. I summary, my data is not lock in, but my audience could be. On the other aspect, Bluesky AppView is only a small part (a microblogging network) of the bigger Atmosphere where we can create different AppViews for different use cases, e.g. publishing (leaflet.pub), code repository (tangled.org). Users can use the same handle and PDS for these AppViews.
- palata 3mo ago
  Yeah I wanted to say that. From a user's point of view, it sounds like the AppView is the instance. If you disagree with the moderation, you can move to a different AppView (that may use different relays) but keep your PDS. Whereas with Mastodon your PDS is your AppView, so if you leave the AppView you lose your PDS (and have to somehow export it). Is that correct?
  - cavoirom 3mo ago
    Yeah, I have the same understanding. On Mastodon, an instance is an all on one package. On Bluesky, each component can be deployed separately. The nuance is Bluesky PBC own the Bluesky (iOS, Android, Web) apps, the AppView and the default PDS hosting, I could say it's centralized by default and decentralized at will.
    - ncallaway 3mo ago
      > I could say it's centralized by default I'm not sure that's totally right, though, because I (using the entirely default bsky stack) can and do regularly interact with people who are using different PDS and AppView's (like, I can interact with Eurosky and blacksky accounts). I think the thing that is centralized by default is the bsky moderation layer.

danabramov 3mo ago

I see! That's a huge topic by itself since you're raising a lot of questions. Maybe this could be a different article. My aim with this one was just to clarify the network topology because it is a prerequisite to having the other discussion, and too often that prerequisite is not there. If you ask a list of specific questions, that would help a lot. I might be able to write something or reply inline here.

JasonSage 3mo ago
I appreciate that a lot! The article has a deliberate and explicit scope, and covers it well. I'm hoping that perhaps my personal perspective shades why "instances" comes up, or why the reaction on HN seems to include the wider scope than the article itself covers.
Vinnl 3mo ago
I felt the same: when folks ask this question they might not be using the correct terminology, but what they actually want to know is how many different PDSes (that's what you mean by "atproto hostings", right?) there are in a typical feed.
- ascorbic 3mo ago
  Currently, just over 3000: https://blue.mackuba.eu/directory/pdses https://blue.mackuba.eu/directory/pdses
  - kuschku 3mo ago
    There are: - 221 with over 5 accounts - 74 with over 20 accounts - 19 with over 250 accounts - 8 with over 1000 accounts. And only a handful of those have open signups (13 with open signups have >50 users). Many of them are actually ActivityPub instances with a PDS bridge, e.g., https://join.wafrn.net/ https://join.wafrn.net/ And most of the other open signup instances are also primarily designed as their own social network, just using AT proto as a compatibility layer, e.g., https://sprk.so/ https://sprk.so/ https://haruhwa.com/ https://haruhwa.com/ (which is an invite-based, snapchat-style ephemeral social network), https://surf.social/ https://surf.social/, https://pckt.blog/ https://pckt.blog/ (a microblogging platform), aesthetic.computer (a collaborative programming/art platform) That leaves only bluesky, blacksky, eurosky, selfhosted.social, self.surf and npmx.social. Even during Facebook's heyday, the unsuccessful diaspora/friendica/gnu social/etc networks had more decentralization than that.
    - ascorbic 3mo ago
      Spark, pckt (and leaflet, tangled) etc aren't using atproto as a compatibility layer: they're fully-fledged apps built on the network.
      - Vinnl 3mo ago
        Right, but I think a typical Bluesky user never sees data from there in their feeds? Don't get me wrong, I think it's pretty cool that you can run all these different apps and have them store their data on their own PDSes. And theoretically it's possible for everyone in my Bluesky feed to be on their own PDS and use different apps. But the question from a Mastodon point of view is: is that the case in practice, and if not, how likely is it that there will ever be a significant portion of non-Bluesky posts in an average microblog feed, on atproto?
wmf 3mo ago
I'm one of those "is it decentralized yet" people and to me the real concern is the AppView since I assume that's where censorship would be applied if it ever happens. People keep telling me about PDSes but I don't care about controlling my PDS if other people can't see my posts.
- palata 3mo ago
  > I don't care about controlling my PDS if other people can't see my posts. Isn't that similar with Mastodon? Someone on an instance that does not federate with yours will not see your posts, and I guess someone on an instance that would censor you would not see your posts? That someone would have to change instance if they disagree with the moderation, and doing so is more painful with ActivityPub than with ATProto, right? Disclaimer: I have no skin in this game, I don't use social networks. Just interested technically :-).
  - nrabulinski 3mo ago
    It’s not more painful because there’s plenty of alternatives for activitypub instances, but only one bluesky. And you’re meant to either host your own instance, or pick one that aligns with your views and interests, such that the bulk of moderation is handled for you in terms of which instances you federate with etc.
    - chokolad 3mo ago
      > It’s not more painful because there’s plenty of alternatives for activitypub instances, but only one bluesky. No, there is not. There is blacksky, northsky, eurosky. They all display the data from your PDS.
      - kuschku 3mo ago
        I'm already running my own RSS reader, Matrix server, Mastodon instance, etc. How do I run my own appview? They surely have a git repo, docker images and helm chart, right? And if I can't self-host it, surely every local computer club should be able to, as they are with all the other protocols?

cavoirom 3mo ago

I could see "Bluesky AppView" has similar semantic as Mastodon instance: network, moderation... The difference is on ATProto, when I get banned, people must switch to another "AppView instance" (could be reusing the same Bluesky AppView stack) to interact with me. I summary, my data is not lock in, but my audience could be. On the other aspect, Bluesky AppView is only a small part (a microblogging network) of the bigger Atmosphere where we can create different AppViews for different use cases, e.g. publishing (leaflet.pub), code repository (tangled.org). Users can use the same handle and PDS for these AppViews.

palata 3mo ago
Yeah I wanted to say that. From a user's point of view, it sounds like the AppView is the instance. If you disagree with the moderation, you can move to a different AppView (that may use different relays) but keep your PDS. Whereas with Mastodon your PDS is your AppView, so if you leave the AppView you lose your PDS (and have to somehow export it). Is that correct?
- cavoirom 3mo ago
  Yeah, I have the same understanding. On Mastodon, an instance is an all on one package. On Bluesky, each component can be deployed separately. The nuance is Bluesky PBC own the Bluesky (iOS, Android, Web) apps, the AppView and the default PDS hosting, I could say it's centralized by default and decentralized at will.
  - ncallaway 3mo ago
    > I could say it's centralized by default I'm not sure that's totally right, though, because I (using the entirely default bsky stack) can and do regularly interact with people who are using different PDS and AppView's (like, I can interact with Eurosky and blacksky accounts). I think the thing that is centralized by default is the bsky moderation layer.