this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2024
202 points (95.9% liked)

Asklemmy

43870 readers
1327 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I's heard news that BlueSky has been growing a lot as Xitter becomes worse and worse, but why do people seem to prefer BlueSky? This confuses me because BlueSky does not have any federalization technologies built into it, meaning it's just another centralized platform, and thus vulnerable to the same things that make modern social media so horrible.

And so, in the hopes of having a better understanding, I've come here to ask what problems Mastodon has that keep people from migrating to it and what is BlueSky doing so right that it attracts so many people.

This question is directed to those who have used all three platforms, although others are free to put out their own thoughts.

(To be clear, I've never used Xitter, BlueSky or Mastodon. I'm asking specifically so that I don't have to make an account on each to find out by myself.)


Edit:

Edit2: (changed the wording a bit on the last part of point 1 to make my point clearer.)

From reading the comments, here are what seems to be the main reasons:

  1. Federation is hard

The concept of federation seems to be harder to grasp than tech people expected. As one user pointed out, tech literacy is much less prevalent than tech folk might expect.

On Mastodon, you must pick an instance, for some weird "federation" tech reason, whatever that means; and thanks to that "federation" there are some post you cannot see (due to defederalization). To someone who barely understands what a server is, the complex network of federalization is to much to bare.

BlueSky, on the other hand, is simple: just go to this website, creating an account and Ta Da! Done! No need to understand anything else.

~~The federalized nature of Mastodon seems to be its biggest flaw.~~

The unfamiliar and more complex nature of Mastodon's federalization technology seems to be its biggest obstacle towards achieving mass adoption.

  1. No Algorithm

Mastodon has no algorithm to surface relevant posts, it is just a chronological timeline. Although some prefer this, others don't and would rather have an algorithm serving them good quality post instead of spending 10h+ curating a subscription feed.

  1. UI and UX

People say that Mastodon (and Lemmy) have HORRIBLE UX, which will surely drive many away from Mastodon. Also, some pointed out that BlueSky's overall design more closely follows that of Twitter, so BlueSky quite literally looks more like pre-Musk Xitter.

(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 day ago (1 children)

.....BlueSky does not have any federalization technologies built into it, meaning it's just another centralized platform, and thus vulnerable to the same things that make modern social media so horrible.

Ask your average social media user what any of that means and you'll get blank stares.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

the average social media user wants to know what face cream Kim Kardashian uses, follows Cristiano Ronaldo and thinks you should go back to your own country.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's lack of marketing since it is not a business, and people conflating useful optional features with confusing usage.

Everyone I know moved to bluesky, after which bluesky basically immediately sold out to crypto people. I brought up the idea of "hey, this is why I think mastodon is a lot better, because it's impossible for it to sell out entirely", to which one person lost their fucking shit and responded stating that I was "fear mongering".

This person also said they didn't care if a business owned all their data and controlled their entire life because "all their data is owned already anyway".

This same person also said that after the recent US election they "spent the night throwing up until they were dry heaving and crying".

Why they claim to not care about their life being controlled by corporate entities, but claim to care so hard about their life being controlled by a government that they say they have a physical reaction to it is a subject I haven't broached because I'm sure they wouldn't be able to see their hypocrisy if they pointed the James Webb telescope at themselves.

In a nut shell, many people are incredibly stupid and not at all interested in their best interests unless the news tells them which interests they should care about.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

basically immediately sold out to crypto people.

Wait what? I know very little about BlueSky and even less about the people behind it, so I didn't know that. Could you send me a link to more info?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] -1 points 16 hours ago

same reason we just elected donald fucking trump. people will always take the easy option that makes them feel good.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 day ago (3 children)

its about blueskys volume reaching a 'critical mass' which will continue to then draw users.

huge groups (recently, brazil) moved there en-masse because it already had a ton of users.

its the same reason twiiter even still has users.. they dont want to leave that volume of subscribers.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Just because BlueSky isn’t federated doesn’t mean it’s (totally) centralized. It uses the AT protocol which means user data lives in a separate place than the app itself. While the BlueSky app is centralized all the user data (your posts, likes, etc) live in a separate place and can be self-hosted. This means that if BlueSky went bust or something, users could easily just move to a new platform that someone would inevitably create and all of their data, likes, follows would all be there.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

is that migration documented?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 day ago (4 children)

I agree with the other commenter's points, but one thing I think people forget to mention is that BlueSky feels like Twitter in a way Mastodon just doesn't. When I am trying to pitch Mastodon to people, I usually compare it to Tumblr because the vibes are similar.

Mastodon is also flat out hostile to influencers, and by that I mean the platform is designed to be terrible to influencers. The lack of an alogarithm means you can't game the system, no quote tweets means you get less opportunities to spread, no reply limiting means your notifications are going to be going nuts from the replies. The culture on Mastodon is difficult to game too, since people there expect thoughtful responses to their replies.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 day ago

Exactly. The design, the sign-up process, the colors, the formatting, it's all very pre-Musk-Twitter.

Even the icon is reminiscent!

It's as smooth a transition as you can make it, so no wonder people do it effortlessly.

Meanwhile in camp Mastodon: "Please pick a server" -> tab closed already

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Because federation is confusing to the general populace

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 day ago (1 children)

People don't care about federation. Or vendor lock-in.

I haven't tried bluesky, but mastodon seems a little broken by design. I'd you go to a post you are always told that the host server may have more replies. Things like that make it seem immature and perhaps just a bad solution compared to a monolithic approach.

If you don't like the instance (why wouldn't I?) you can just move to a different one. Yes, and restart my network. It's not really a good solution. I would like to exist on mastodon and just use some server. If I don't like it, continue somewhere else.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The federalized nature of Mastodon seems to be its biggest flaw.

Just to be devil's advocate, perhaps the federated nature of Mastodon could be its greatest strength as well. Isn't part of the point of all of this to avoid too much centralized control of social media?

Sure, Mastodon may never have as much mainstream appeal as BlueSky, but I use both. One of the reasons why I like Mastodon is precisely because I want to interact with more of a niche community on a federated platform. To interact with the masses on a platform that is more centralized, I use BlueSky.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

A lot of people are offput by having to choose a server before creating an account. If that could be automated somehow I think Mastodon would be more popular.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 day ago

Yeah... but I think it's too late for Mastodon to be popular. Bluesky is already at the tipping point.

Mastodon just needed to sign you up to their own default server, power users could sign up to different ones and they would have still got the regulars in the door. Mastodon also needed twitter feature parity, something Bluesky also managed much faster.

Once people are in and settled, then they would start asking questions about that URL after their username, people would slowly become comfortable with the federation and understand it.

load more comments
view more: β€Ή prev next β€Ί