I will probably switch to AT proto via Wafrn. (When I feel like getting around to do it.)

IMO AT proto is better protocol for web 3.0 social media than activity pub that feels like web 1.0 with interoperability.

AT proto is based on identities not on instances. If your instance is gone then too bad. Your account is gone too. In AT proto you can forcefully migrate your account.

Subscribing to independed labellers and feeds is also good. It feels like build your social media but with modularity than interconnected silos of instances.

I don't like that AT proto is controlled by bluesky but usefulness is better that principle. I will just switch to another thing when it enshittifies enough.

It's fine right now still, but given it's a centralized, corporate-run platform at the end of the day, I'm skeptical of its long-term prospects; what's stopping the guys in charge of that platform from going turncoat and turning it fully into Twitter 2.0?

Mastodon by contrast of being an open, decentralized platform, has some immunity against the enshittification that will inevitably ruin any centralized platform.

I'm still a user but prefer Mastadon and Lemmy from a user and engagement perspective

Avoid Bluesky.

"When asked if Bluesky would always be free of advertisers like it is today, Graber said: “I don’t think that’s necessarily true.”" —https://techcrunch.com/2024/12/05/bluesky-ceo-jay-graber-is-reshaping-social-media-but-advertising-isnt-off-the-table/

the legion of shills all but disappeared about 3 months in. i guess their budget ran out. but at least we stopped getting the anti-fedi pro-bluesky spam here at the fediverse so i don't care anymore if its alive or not. mastodon is the only social media i use today not counting aggregation portals like lemmy.

VC financed social media at the start of its enshittification journey. Started interesting with open protocol but seems it has no ambitions of being open.

Deleted my account 6 months ago and haven’t missed it.

It's just twitter 2.0, may as well be closed source, and it's a joke to call it decentralized. I'm only on there because the community I keep up with is mostly on there, but the site is literally unusable without the blocklist feature, which of its own is incredibly easy to abuse. It was far better when it was almost entirely a leftist space, before the big twitter exodus of liberals.

Mastodon's looking far better on the casual usability front lately so maybe folks will start moving over there soon.

It's not compatible at all. And bots acting as bridges isn't compatibility.

As for self hosting an instance that is federated with the official Bluesky instance, you will only be able to do that in your dreams. You can self host your own PDS though.

Bluesky is the most centralized decentralized platform

It never had a chance. There's no way to make profit selling ads and user data and have it be decentralized. They are conflicting goals.

I'm not saying there aren't other ways to make a profit on a decentralized platform, but they never said they had any other business model, so we had to assume that the traditional one was it, and we were right.

I'm not saying I'm very knowledgeable but as your asking for the consensus. I think Bluesky is much better than twitter but it doesn't properly embody the ideals of the fediverse: that is a decentralized network of instances but it really only has one main instance. It's also heavily viewed as an alternative to twitter, people who like twitter but don't like X or the way elon musk is running things so the same people who don't like twitter go to X and therefore the community isn't so much better.

But who am I to say this I don't even use twitter mastadon or Bluesky.

As far as I know Bluesky protocol is open-source but not its main app. Also, there are several apps available to use Mastodon. Additionally, note that Bluesky uses the AT Protocol (developed by Bluesky) while Mastodon uses ActivityPub (W3C standard) which is more friendly for third-party devs.

As far as federation is concerned it's still mostly centralized with Bluesky while Mastodon is fully federated.

Something I personaly like as well with Mastodon is that the feeds don't use algorithms.

Works fine. Most of the artists I followed from twitter moved there. and its quite a nice place.

certainly more hospitable than the nazi platform, that's for sure.

It's still for profit, not federated and ~~closed source~~ so honestly I don't know why it's being discussed here

It turned out to be a Twitter clone from ten years ago and I realized I didn't need that any more. If I didn't need to reach some people who cannot overcome the hurdle the fediverse proper puts up before being enjoyable, I would not be using it today. But media popularity post-Elon-Twitter and relative ease of setup have given the platform relative heft. But it's not open and not really federated so it's masquerading and we don't really want you know whose money is paying the bills behind the scenes either. If anything, the fediverse can learn from Bluesky a thing or two about onboarding people who cannot be asked to invest the time to make Mastodon enjoyable. It will take time, much more time, to get people, especially non-techy ones, to the new normal of being your own algorithm. I see Bluesky as a stepping stone in that direction that will survive in its own niche.

On the same note, how is the interoperability between threads and the Fediverse nowadays?

Mrs. Erinaceus loves it, after fleeing Xwitter and being disappointed with Mastodon. However, in this Wired article/interview (which I read some time ago and might not remember all that well), Bluesky's CEO comes across as being, well, a CEO. Judge for yourself: Bluesky Is Plotting a Total Takeover of the Social Internet.

the closest thing to "compatible" is the bridge which is sort of creates a bot account on the other network that copies the source toots/¿blues?

First let's kill X, that's reason enough to use it for now. At least you're still supporting more open protocols

used it for a bit but just got bored so deleted my profile.