I would like to give an update on "federation" on Bluesky

[whitequark@mastodon.social]

@mcc it's such a confusing aspect of the protocol. why does everything need the firehose? how do they expect it to scale/?

[mcc@mastodon.social]

@whitequark If hypothetically, just hypothetically, we imagine that a core design requirement of the protocol was "regardless of what happens in future, it must continue to be necessary that the company Bluesky LLC exists"… the decision becomes a lot less confusing.

[mcc@mastodon.social]

@whitequark (More charitably: If one considered fast, full-text search to be a highest priority feature, and it was merely *unimportant* to the designer whether a second full-service node could ever function… then one might make the decisions bluesky made here.

As for scaling, I assume when the day comes they need it to actually scale they'll either discontinue or break the externally-published linear event stream?)

[megmac@social.treehouse.systems]

@mcc @whitequark reminds me of the good(*) old days when the Twitter firehose was open... Surely history would never repeat...

(*) in hindsight probably not actually.

[gsuberland@chaos.social]

@whitequark @mcc given the history of the whole thing, I find it exceedingly likely that this is a feature rather than a bug, i.e. the entire premise of it was to capture an emerging market and user-base by riding the decentralisation buzz and tying it into blockchain/web3 (and NFTs to a lesser extent). it's also on brand - solutions that purport to empower users while really just maintaining plausible deniability for control and financial gain are the lifeblood of that class of technologist.

[mcc@mastodon.social]

:frogsiren: BLUESKY HAS OFFICIALLY NETSPLIT :frogsiren:

There has always been more than one Fediverse. Different instances make different moderation decisions so some instances can't see posts by some users.

There has only ever been one Bluesky because every ATProto frontend uses the same Appview.

It is January 2026 and that's no longer true; Blacksky's Appview is available for beta use and there is at least 1 user banned on Bluesky but not Blacksky. And vice versa.

https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:w4xbfzo7kqfes5zb7r6qv3rw/post/3mcozwdhjos2b

[greyduck@wellduck.me]

@mcc I haven't thought about the term 'netsplit' in AGES.

Also: Huh. Makes one wonder what Blewski's response will be.

[mayintoronto@beige.party]

@mcc Would this mean that there'd be a new bridgy specifically to Blacksky?

[quillmatiq@mastodon.social]

@mayintoronto No - Bridgy Fed supports any ATProto PDS, including the ones run by Blacksky

@mcc

[coracinho@sunbeam.city]

@mcc for us tech noobies in the audience, could you explain what does this mean?

[mcc@mastodon.social]

The "portable identity" elements of Bluesky/ATProto make the netsplit just a tad odd. My account is hosted on a PDS server I run, so I'm beholden to no frontend. If I log in through the main Blacksky frontend (Bluesky appview) one user I'm following shows only an error message. Via the Staging Blacksky frontend (atproto.africa), I can see I'm following him and see his posts. I'm SO curious about the edge cases. I assume if I boost him it's hidden from the Bluesky appview. What if I reply to him?

[fabrice@fosstodon.org]

@mcc When you are suspended by bluesky corp, is the ban at the app view or PDS level?

[martinvermeer@fediscience.org]

@quillmatiq @mayintoronto @mcc But what if I want to cancel the bridge, but only to the Nazi one? Can I do that, and advise my correspondents to migrate to BlackSky? How hard would that be?

[quillmatiq@mastodon.social]

@martinvermeer Not today, but stay tuned for next week 🙂

@mayintoronto @mcc

[mcc@mastodon.social]

Oh and I can't get staging.blacksky on my phone app. So imagine if you were using Mastodon, but you saw a slightly different list of posters, *and potentially a different set of your own posts*, depending on whether you were using your PC or your phone. This is great if there's a banned user you want to follow— you get an *option* to follow them. Mastodon.social can deny me the *option* to follow someone, on Fediverse. But except in this edge case that *might* not be a fantastic user experience!

[mcc@mastodon.social]

@coracinho Does this help? https://mastodon.social/@mcc/115918101156654032

[falken@qoto.org]

@coracinho @mcc #bluesky is like Mastadon amd makes a big deal of being decentralised, any one can run a server or build a client and interoperate, just like email.
This annoyed people because it wasn't practically possible to run a Bluesky server yourself, the demands for storage etc were wild.
#Blacksky are seeming to have made progress in doing so.

#fediverse #geek

[mcc@mastodon.social]

@fabrice This is a VERY interesting question, as the answer appears to be "all of them". And when Link got banned, *that answer appeared to be surprising even to Bluesky employees*. The original messaging from Bluesky suggested you'd get banned only by the "labeler"— a third thing altogether. But there's obvious problems with that answer, it's never what Bluesky implemented. After Link got banned Bluesky said they were reviewing this, but I don't think *changed* anything.

[mcc@mastodon.social]

@falken @coracinho Also the *way* in which Blacksky is making progress seems to me to make it look improbable any of the rest of us will reproduce what Blacksky has done. It's taken months of Rudy's time and he's had to purchase storage for "terabytes" of data because *standing up a new Blacksky "instance", in a total sense, requires literally mirroring everything posted on the network*, including spam and old inaccessible chats on people's https://stream.place streams

[fabrice@fosstodon.org]

@mcc Because if you're banned only by the appview, this seems easy to bypass (just talk to the PDS!), but if you are banned at the PDS level that blocks you from also non-bsky ATProto apps, right? That all look bad to me; my conclusion is that we should own our PDSes (or use a Fediverse style community run one), and that appviews should not exist as centralized services.