I really wish more people realized ATProto is very likely a embrace+extend+extinguish thing. I can’t trust a VC-funded protocol, even more so when it shadows alternatives like ActivityPub
How is it EEE? They’re not embracing any protocol, they’re making their own, they can’t extend it since any extensions are then just part of the spec.
The bluesky teams goal wasn’t just to make a protocol, it was to look for existing ones. They considered AP, but didn’t choose it due to its numerous issues.
Embracing or making their own, doesn’t change the inherent lack of trust coming from its devs. I know there’s efforts for a task force that is independent (w3c I think?), and I’d love to be proven wrong in the future, but for now the design of the protocol seems inherently prone for centralizing in few nodes.
The cost of running relays is already larger than if they’d used AT, and I know the latter has issues too but I can’t help but feel distrust when faced with a protocol that is like that, and again - I cannot stress this enough - VC-backed stuff is known for rugpulls like that, even if the protocol itself is open it wont matter. AFAIK Bluesky’s own impl. is closed-source which is a red flag on itself. If they wanted openness they wouldn’t make it only for the protocol.
I really wish more people realized ATProto is very likely a embrace+extend+extinguish thing. I can’t trust a VC-funded protocol, even more so when it shadows alternatives like ActivityPub
How is it EEE? They’re not embracing any protocol, they’re making their own, they can’t extend it since any extensions are then just part of the spec.
The bluesky teams goal wasn’t just to make a protocol, it was to look for existing ones. They considered AP, but didn’t choose it due to its numerous issues.
Atproto fixes almost all the issues AP has.
Embracing or making their own, doesn’t change the inherent lack of trust coming from its devs. I know there’s efforts for a task force that is independent (w3c I think?), and I’d love to be proven wrong in the future, but for now the design of the protocol seems inherently prone for centralizing in few nodes.
The cost of running relays is already larger than if they’d used AT, and I know the latter has issues too but I can’t help but feel distrust when faced with a protocol that is like that, and again - I cannot stress this enough - VC-backed stuff is known for rugpulls like that, even if the protocol itself is open it wont matter. AFAIK Bluesky’s own impl. is closed-source which is a red flag on itself. If they wanted openness they wouldn’t make it only for the protocol.