Bluesky is a broad network with lots of worthwhile people and conversations! I hope you’ll give it a chance. Only fully public content is bridged, not followers-only, unlisted, or otherwise private posts or profiles. Still, if you want to opt out, I understand. Feel free to DM me at @snarfed@indieweb.social [indieweb.social] (different account than this one), email me [snarfed.org], file a GitHub issue [github.com], or put #nobridge in your profile bio.
(Admins, if you decide beforehand that you don’t want your instance to federate with Bluesky over the bridge, the domain to limit or block is bsky.brid.gy.)
A number of us have thought about this for a while now [snarfed.org], we’re committed to making it work well for everyone, and we’re very open to feedback. Thanks for listening. Feel free to share broadly.
@snarfed.org [fed.brid.gy] @activitypubblueskybridge @fedidevs @fediversenews
If you'd like to use our content, how about paying us for it?
Or at least consider the copyright position of each post/account rather than assuming what we produce is free for you to re-use.
@PCOWandre @snarfed.org@snarfed.org [snarfed.org] @activitypubblueskybridge @fedidevs @fediversenews
Andre, you know, this public post you just wrote, has been temporarily cached by my pleroma server. I wonder if you consider that i'm using your content by simply answering you.
@luca [sironi.tk] @activitypubblueskybridge @fedidevs @fediversenews That would be using the content as intended. In the same way that allowing a browser to cache a web page doesn't entitle the browser use to then republish that content under their own domain.
Similarly, owning and using a DVR doesn't grant one the right to sell copies of a TV show.
I can borrow a book from a library, but that doesn't entitle me to photocopy it, rebind it and sell it to another library.
@PCOWandre @activitypubblueskybridge @fedidevs @fediversenews so i'm preemptively good person/ server because i use activitypub but you don't trust bluesky the company, because they are using that other AT protocol.
But once they opened their protocol, it's not just their company using it, other no profit actors can use it as well.
There are mastodon servers owned by company already.
@luca
It's not a matter of trust; it's a matter of choice. I (and many others) made the *choice* to not touch bluesky and now that choice is being taken away from everyone, by default, unless the individual user happens to know this is coming and hoe to stop it.
When the alternative is to flip this "simple" opt-out to an *equally simple* opt-in, the decision to make it opt-out is a decision to take choice away from your demographic in order to artificially enhance the user uptake of your product.
@PCOWandre @activitypubblueskybridge @fedidevs @fediversenews
@chronohart
@luca [sironi.tk] @PCOWandre @activitypubblueskybridge @fedidevs @fediversenews
Let's be honest most people have no idea this bridge is going to exist. So, they can't opt-in. If nobody opts-in, you won't be able to search for them by their ActivityPub handles. The bridge isn't useful. People on both sides who would like to reconnect with their friends won't be able to. However, if you know you hate BS, you can add the bridge to your personal block list and it isn't an issue for you.
@jamie
If you are an ActivityPub user that wishes to connect with bsky, you will likely find information about this bridge, assuming it isn't an immediate failure, as soon as you search the web for a method to connect ActivityPub to bsky.
@luca @PCOWandre @activitypubblueskybridge @fedidevs @fediversenews
@chronohart
@luca [sironi.tk] @PCOWandre @activitypubblueskybridge @fedidevs @fediversenews
What about if the person reaching out is from BS? If my friend on the AP side hasn't found this bridge and opted in, they won't show up when I try to add them. A lot has to go right for these people to reconnect if they have to opt in. In my case, all I have are remembered Twitter handles that I'll try to search across the bridge fir that handle. If I get results, I'll try to follow.
@jamie
What about people that came to ActivityPub specifically because people that were harassing them are not here? This bridge makes it just that much easier for abusers to find their victims again because all they have to do is try a remembered Twitter handle to see if they get a hit through the bridge.
Do you disagree that this sort of abuse can happen?
@luca @PCOWandre @activitypubblueskybridge @fedidevs @fediversenews
This bridge makes it just that much easier for abusers to find their victims again because all they have to do is try a remembered Twitter handle to see if they get a hit through the bridge.
They could try, but it's highly unlikely that they'll succeed.
They'd have to know or guess on which instance to look for their victims. So they'd theoretically have to try countless instances of dozens of projects, one by one. If their victims aren't residing on big, popular Mastodon instances, they'd have a problem.
@jupiter_rowland
If that's how this will work, what benefit does this automatic opt-in provide to folks that want to use the bridge? If BS users are, realistically, going to need to know the exact username and instance of the AP user, they are going to need to get that information *from* the AP user, in which case they could ask their AP friend to opt-in to the bridge when they ask for the user's name and instance.
If that's how this will work, what benefit does this automatic opt-in provide to folks that want to use the bridge?
There is no automatic opt-in. If this bridge goes online, your Mastodon account is not automatically fully connected to Bluesky, much less automatically data-scraped by Bluesky.
When someone from Bluesky comes and asks you on Mastodon if they may follow you, and you confirm that, yes, they may follow you, then you opt in. And only then will your Mastodon account be connected to Bluesky. No earlier.
Unless, of course, your account is set up so that anyone can follow you without your interaction and your explicit consent. And I sincerely doubt that tech.lgbt, out of all instances, has this setting as a default.
If BS users are, realistically, going to need to know the exact username and instance of the AP user, they are going to need to get that information *from* the AP user
...which is exactly how it works in the Fediverse itself.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #Bluesky #Bridge #BridgyFed #BlueskyBridge
@jupiter_rowland
It *is* auto opt-in. If I do nothing, I can be follow requested by a BS user. I never said the opt-in was for a full connection.
The setting to automatically approve follow requests is a user-level setting, not instance, so me being on tech.lgbt has nothing to do with that.
That last part you took out of context. Yes, that *is* how it works on the fediverse. The difference is someone has to *be on* the fediverse to find you. If a BS user needs to get the full handle of their friend to find them through the bridge, why can't they also just ask their friend to opt-in to the bridge?
It *is* auto opt-in. If I do nothing, I can be follow requested by a BS user. I never said the opt-in was for a full connection.
As long as you don't confirm the request, no connection of your account with Bluesky will be established.
That is, if the goal is to make it absolutely impossible for anyone on Bluesky to even send you a follow request... or even only find you...
The setting to automatically approve follow requests is a user-level setting, not instance, so me being on tech.lgbt has nothing to do with that.
In just too many cases, instance-level is user-level because just too many Mastodon users never adjust any settings in their accounts or profiles and go with the defaults forever. They feel it's too complicated or too inconvenient, or whatever mobile app they use doesn't have controls for these settings, or they don't even know that certain settings exist, or whatever.
Same reason why opt-out for full-text search was rioted against: 99% of all Mastodon users will never even come across the switch, and they'll have the default setting forced upon them, whether that's okay for them or not.
The .lgbt TLD implies that the target audience of tech.lgbt is the LGBTQIA+ community. People who were often harassed on Twitter before they came to Mastodon. And the "tech" part implies someone tech-savvy behind it.
I cannot for the life of me imagine that tech.lgbt, out of all Mastodon instances, has automatic follow request confirmation on as the instance-wide default.
That last part you took out of context. Yes, that *is* how it works on the fediverse. The difference is someone has to *be on* the fediverse to find you.
The only sure-fire way of finding everyone in the Fediverse is by copy-pasting their ID into a search field. No different from Mastodon from Hubzilla or, when the bridge goes live, from Bluesky. This means you need that ID in the first place, and searching only serves to turn the ID into something clickable.
Generally: Any search on any instance in the Fediverse can only find accounts/channels which this instance knows. There is no place in the Fediverse with what amounts to a central registry of all Fediverse accounts/channels. Not even mastodon.social knows everyone.
Bluesky doesn't know anyone in the Fediverse at all right now. When the bridge goes online, Bluesky will still not know anyone at all, much less everyone. After a bit of interaction, Bluesky will only know whom it has interacted with. At most, it will also know the Fediverse IDs of accounts/channels that have been mentioned. If it's interested in that.
This is exactly how everything else in the Fediverse works, be it a brand-new Mastodon instance that has only been spun up for the first time, be it a Hubzilla hub that has been around since 2015, but whose admin turns ActivityPub on for the first time.
If a BS user needs to get the full handle of their friend to find them through the bridge, why can't they also just ask their friend to opt-in to the bridge?
Because they first have to send a follow request to their friend.
The opt-in prompt comes with the follow request. It will not be a switch in Mastodon. Otherwise, everything else (save for Friendica) would have to implement that opt-in switch for a third-party bridge separately. Thus, a follow request is necessary.
But in order to send that follow request, the Bluesky user would have to specify whoever that follow request shall be sent to.
Now, at that point, Bluesky may pretty well not know that friend at all yet, so searching them would be moot.
The only imaginable way to send the friend request would be to enter the friend's Fediverse ID into some text field or other, search field or whatever, I don't know Bluesky's UI. And enter it in a form that Bluesky understands.
If Bluesky has such a field in the first place. And one that can handle throught-the-bridge Fediverse IDs.
In fact, chances are Bluesky users will only be able to follow Fediverse accounts/channels which are already known to Bluesky, and which are presented to them in or on something they can click on.
Chances are that Bluesky's account search does not understand the Fediverse ID format that comes out of the bridge, and thus, Bluesky users can't use its search with Fediverse IDs at all. Because even when the bridge is live, if some enters
@chronohart@tech.lgbt into Bluesky's search, Bluesky will understand this as a Bluesky ID, search Bluesky for it and not find it. It won't even come up with the idea that this could be on Mastodon, i.e. on a wholly different network.Remember that Bluesky is not being developed to interact with the Fediverse. It will not have any Fediverse support built-in at all whatsoever.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #Friendica #Bluesky #Bridge #BridgyFed #BlueskyBridge