Why are they selecting BlueSky over the Fediverse?
BlueSky is specifically designed as a drop-in Twitter replacement, it’s an easy transition, and tons of Twitter users have been advertising it for a long time. The Fediverse is comparatively obscure.
also mainstream professionals are going to bluesky, like press and corp PR. big step towards critical mass.
And it’s ridiculous because the difference between Mastodon and Twitter is minuscule.
I remember following some popular Twitter Head. Someone made a fake account on Mastodon and started getting followers but only posted once. Since then, his followers have grown to around 11k without any content at all! Imagine if it had been a real account. But the Twitter Head would rather switch to Bluesky instead. Such bullshit.
deleted by creator
It really isn’t minuscule, it’s still confusing enough for the vast majority of people. Just the fact that there are different servers and them having to learn about that is enough to put people off. Anything more complicated than basic sign-up/in weeds out 90% of people, every tiny little thing they need to learn makes it less likely they’ll even think about using it.
This is obvious. The way you and many others here think about how knowledgeable, tech-literate and willing to lift just one extra finger the average person is isn’t correct, people are dumb and lazy. And it hurts the fediverse as a whole and slows adoption.
Your opinion and my reply here have been said thousands of times, I don’t understand how your kind of ignorance and misunderstanding is still so prevalent, I see it almost weekly.
your kind of ignorance and misunderstanding
I was with you up until this. I was taking about my perception but thanks for generalizing and passing judgement anyway, jerkface.
I also see your kind of bullshit regularly on here, with many not giving the benefit of the doubt, not asking follow up questions, and therefore assuming the worst takes. Every single time.
The Fediverse experience starts with an unanswerable question: what server do you want to be on?
Most people will not have any way to answer that without knowing what the downstream impact will be. Mastodon people are working on smoothing that down, but it’s still a pretty fraught question. And if half a given community ends up on one server and half on another, they get fragmented and conversations and followers fizzle out.
Bluesky wants to tell people they’re not a single-node lock-in to avoid the Twitter effect, but it turns out that’s their key advantage.
The only thing that will guarantee they don’t end up like Twitter is if they revamp their corporate governance mechanisms, but they had to take VC money and haven’t come up with a long-term revenue model, so it’s not clear how they can avoid it.
The email experience starts with an unanswerable question: what server do you want to be on?
Your email server doesn’t also run the group email list and all the join/drop/approve/ban operations. And if you bring your own email domain name, you can go somewhere else and get no disruption. But if you sign up for me@hotmail.com and hotmail bans you, you’ll lose all your connections and conversation history.
The canonical list of operations on a social media platform far exceed that of an email service, a bulletin board, or a messaging service group. It’s apples and rocket ships.
Bluesky is offering simple one-stop answers to a lot of these concerns. Fediverse needs to answer all these, plus address the whole long-term financial sustainability question.
No that decision is, for most people, made for them. You use the server provided for you by your ISP/work/university or the one that’s associated with logging into your smartphone.
“How can I send Gmails?”
I would assume the same reason anyone chooses it over the fediverse, because they want their content to be easily discoverable.
The fediverse just doesn’t have the audience nor ease of use to be the smart investment for most people, at least in the short term.
In the long term, I believe the fediverse would be the right move. However most people struggle to think long-term outside of their own fields, and scientists are not immune to this phenomenon.
I don’t understand why people ask this. Most people you talk to on Lemmy will say they don’t want the userbase to grow much more than it has because with that growth comes the other problems that larger platforms like shitter and reddit have.
That’s true by and large and we also don’t have enough moderators here as is.
And for reasons I don’t understand, people keep asking why mainstream media outlets, influencers, and other trusted accounts don’t transition to the fediverse, as if they won’t bring with them an influx of users (at least a fraction of which would be considered undesirable).
Why do you want them to come here? (As someone who would like to see Lemmy grow, I’m curious about how you think this will rollout and what the consequences will be). I would like to see Lemmy grow but I’m not sure all of that growth will have solely good follow-on effects.
Because the Fediverse is a mess with atrocious UX. Choose the wrong server and you might find you are cut off from a large chunk of it because a mastodon.art mod didn’t like something that happened on your instance and servers copy blocklist from each other (not a theoretical example, mind you, something I learned a few months into being on one particular instance.).
Servers can have all sorts of rules you will have to carefully study or risk getting banned (some for example will only allow images with descriptions being shared, this includes boosts.)
In short, the amount of work expected to participate is just - never - going to draw in the average user.
Presumably either because they’ve not heard of the Fediverse, because almost nobody has, and/or because they want people to actually see what they post.
Its too nerdy for its own good. The plebs want simple. Its the way of things.
Probably because it has an algorithm
tech and age, need for investment.
- fediverse is complicated for scientists not doing computer sciency stuff
- senior researchers are less flexible with new tech, so similarity w twitter means they don’t have to learn a new system
- Already present audience means there’s little risk in investing time in BS.
This.
Many people like stuff getting recommending to them algorithmically.
Exactly. I’ve curated my Mastodon feed way more than Bsky, and still, it’s incredibly boring. Great if you want to use socials less.
It also tends to overvalue new stuff, so whoever screams the most occupies the most space in the feed.
It doesn’t though.
Cool. I’m going out on a limb and saying Bluesky seems pretty based so far. I made an account when it was announced, and it’s pretty cool. Nice app, seemingly good mission statement.
I don’t want to dismiss something until it actually turns to shit. If it’s good now, I’ll use it now. When it turns to crap, I’ll just jump off. I’ll always have Lemmy and Mastodon as my mains, so I don’t see the harm personally. 🤷♂️ Let’s just hope it’ll last for the scientists’ sake.
Problem is it absolutely will turn when the Bluesky owners Jay Graber and Jack Dorsey decide it’s time to cash in. The project started out as a way to start decentralizing twitter, but they never actually accomplished that goal.
Why is it a problem? If a tool is good now, I’ll use it now.
I don’t stop myself from buying a new axe just because it’ll break eventually, you know what I mean?
Although obviously if there was an axe that never would break, I’d buy that! But maybe there are trade-offs. Maybe the never-breaking axe has a complicated handle or something. I don’t know, I’m trying my best with the axe analogy to describe Bluesky vs Mastodon. 😅 Hopefully it’s clear enough!
We can avoid it ever becoming shit when a wannabe dictator buys it if we make it impossible to sell: like mastodon and other federated options.
Right, that’s the sure-fire way. But if a platform is better in some way than another, I’m inclined to use it, as long as it’s morally just to do so.
I like Bluesky because it’s more like Twitter was. But I like Mastodon because of how liberated it is. So I’ll use both, probably, until Bluesky turns to shit (or doesn’t).
It’s a problem for the same reason twitter dying sucks… The network effect is important, and maintaining yours during a slow, piecemeal mass migration is hard. Which is why I’m sticking with mastodon now, despite more of my relevant network being on BS.
Would be better if it was Mastodon, but I suppose I shouldn’t let perfect be the enemy of good, and good riddance to Twitter, indeed.
Same here, well said. Bluesky’s not perfect, at least it’s not Twitter. I wish more people would use it though
nothing makes me more skeptical than seeing the word “scientists” in a headline.
oof. blue sky was created by the guy who made twitter wasn’t it? if he sells to the next bond villain, blue sky will just become twitter 2.0.
open source, decentralized.
i have accepted that most of the internet will be a vicious cycle of enshittification. go to cool new site, site gets too popular for its own good, monetization kicks in, site now sucks, rinse and repeat.
FOSS stuff like lemmy and mastodon will never get past the first step, which is fine. they will just occupy a separate niche.
I would prefer any ActivityPub instance, but press media (and in general private entities), to which scientific institutes intend diffusion, is moving to bluesky…
When I first got a Bluesky account, back when it was invite-only a whole bunch of the Physicists and Astronomers I used to follow on Twitter were already there. If anything it seemed like scientists were early adopters.
Sort of like how they moved out of Florida and Texas. Repubs want a brain drain for some reason.
Now all governments around the globe and other public services and we.are getting somewhere.
Neat, I have an account on there already.
Proof that people rarely know much about anything outside of their field. They’ll just be playing this song and dance again when the Bluesky owner cashes in.
If/when that happens, its still better than giving twitter any traffic.
All these people - they don’t learn.
For microblogs NOSTR is already better than everything else, right now. Provided you don’t care much about keeping the same identity over years, cause an identity is a pubkey there, used directly (no temporary identities signed by it or something), so with more popularity those will be lost again and again.
I don’t use microblogs, just it seems to have that functionality functioning perfectly and in distributed fashion.
If you don’t like cryptobros there (less and less dominant over time btw), then BlueSky might raise even bigger suspicions.
