Bluesky Anyone?
waist.it said, 1732045466
MidgePhoto said
Bluesky depends on a single nodal point owned by a company, the relay servers, although they distribute some storage to users.
That is the same vulnerability to assorted failures and nastinesses as Xitter.
The Fediverse - Mastodon, Pixelview and a few other apps - is properly distributed.
Photog.social is a server that is what it sounds like; I've not seen one called models.social but I'd not rule it out; and kinkyelephant.social is related to a model on here.
One need not set up one's own, but can't be stopped from doing so. And then looking for others that will federate.
True though as I understand it AT (aka Atmosphere)is an open protocol and could be used independently of the central server. Biggest issue - again as understand it - is that Atmosphere protocol is currently incompatible with the Fediverse.
However, my impression is that is the main driver underlying the move to BlueSky is not a technical one. It's more to do with giving the proverbial finger to Elmo... ;-)
Kirk Schwarz said, 1732045499
MidgePhoto said
Bluesky depends on a single nodal point owned by a company, the relay servers, although they distribute some storage to users.
That is the same vulnerability to assorted failures and nastinesses as Xitter.
The Fediverse - Mastodon, Pixelview and a few other apps - is properly distributed.
Photog.social is a server that is what it sounds like; I've not seen one called models.social but I'd not rule it out; and kinkyelephant.social is related to a model on here.
One need not set up one's own, but can't be stopped from doing so. And then looking for others that will federate.
I think the 'nastiness' on Twitter has come about from the people that use it, and the failure, the man that owns it.
Paul Archer Photography said, 1732047829
I have also joined Bluesky - it looks very promising, I hope it is successful!
