I would argue that’s centralisation. Instances are inherently centralised, they own the user identity, relationships and data. A user “migration” which isn’t really a migration it’s an alt account on another server, if that server is blocking or is blocked then that users social graph can be significantly impacted. There’s no way to really migrate their content.
I get what you lot are getting at but my objection is this, at least when it comes to the Mastodon part of the Fediverse it gets advertised as the nicest social experiences. Mastodon not the Fediverse has a moat on civility, some of the most nasty experiences I’ve seen people have is on fedi. That creates a very different expectation and thus people don’t want to hear “that’s the internet for you”. If it wasn’t marketed as such then I’d completely agree with the points being made.
Also, it’s so toxic yet he’s using the account still and bridged his fediverse account. If I encountered next level toxicity that’s not what I’d be doing
This person is a liar and just wants the Mastodon pat on the back. For some reason people on the fediverse can’t just enjoy their platforms and work to make them better. They have to lie about Bluesky and Nostr. I’ve been on Bluesky since the beginning. I’ve seen significantly more toxic people and content on fedi than I’ve ever have on Bluesky.
People are happy to be away from X, they’re trying to promote a positive and supportive culture. There’s tonnes of minorities on Bluesky
What’s different about the fediverse? There’s mute lists, block lists, keyword filters, they have a third party company plus a trust and safety team. They’ve taken down plenty of accounts. So again what’s no moderation? What’s better moderation and tooling on fedi? I’ve seen CSAM on Mastodon yet not on Bluesky
You said that like that’s been reality, I’m not going based on simply what’s possible but what’s happened when instances suddenly shutdown
If the same came be achieved why hasn’t it been? It is a matter of individualism. People often see instances as communities, I don’t agree with this assessment with the exception of coop and special interest instances.
But you weren’t discussing Twitter you were discussing Bluesky. They built it with decentralised identities so that users owned their identities and can move about freely.
You saying people could “easily” move to another instance isn’t reality. People already find the Fediverse too difficult, as you and I discussed under a different thread people actually care about their data which also includes their posting history. Humans by nature do not like change. People complain about Mastodon.social being too big to block. So, if people that want to block mastodon.social due to what they believe is poor content moderation but feel they can’t because of its size how likely that people would find it “easy” to move to another instance ?
That’s not true it’s not entirely punted to the end user. It starts with the relay operators just like it does instances. All of the same moderation tools that users have on instances and with clients Nostr users have too, so I’m not really sure about that comment.
Also, maybe it’s because I’m a US citizen but I don’t get what so problematic about individualism and allowing users the ability to drive their own experiences.
You mention the keys that’s still under user control as if instances have not gone down with users identities, content and social graphs
Usability worse than anything on AP that’s very broad. Go point for point with comparisons
You can filter out any content related to Bitcoin.
It does block them more so than on fedi. When I block someone they can’t see my content nor account, they can’t log out and go see my content. It’s not just filtered, also they have banned accounts and removed content
So, much of what you stated makes my head spin, maybe it’s due to the fact that it’s early but I highly doubt that’s the reason.