Note that accounts on both networks must follow the main bridge account to work.

    • Fisch@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      2 days ago

      We have that, it’s called ActivityPub. BlueSky wouldn’t want that tho, they couldn’t control the entire network then, after all.

      • woelkchen@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        If the BlueSky protocol offers tangible benefits over ActivityPub, the BlueSky protocol could become the basis for ActivityPub 2.0. I don’t know much about the details, though.

        • Fisch@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 days ago

          The BlueSky protocol relies on central servers tho, I’m not sure if there’s much that ActivityPub can take inspiration from

          • Twoafros@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            Non technical person here, I would love to hear more about how decentralized (or not decentralized) the Bluesky protocol is compared to ActivityPub

            • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 hour ago

              Here is a good blogpost about it

              https://taggart-tech.com/20241124-bluesky-questions-pt1/

              Check out this mastodon thread and associated links

              https://social.wildeboer.net/@jwildeboer/113504285308484716

              TL;DR Bluesky is not functionally federated nor decentralized, it is dubious if it ever will be and the layer of post sorting and moderation required to participate in Bluesky’s network is extremely computationally intensive and this aspect of Bluesky is NOT open source and is a proprietary black box.

              The fediverse and activity pub are the future, even if the current hype train leaving the station (…who is paying for all the free drinks on that train and why?) makes it feel otherwise in the short term.

      • Glasgow@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        The lack of account portability means activitypub is unsuitable for both bsky and just in general.

        • Fisch@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 days ago

          They could have also worked to implement that into ActivityPub but they still chose to reinvent the wheel

        • FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          Yeah, bluesky has a bunch of features, notably account portability, which was specifically designed into the ATProtocol.

          The purpose of the ATProtocol was never to federate with Activitypub, it was to build a more feature rich and scalable “federated” protocol.

          Read More