Una buena noticia sobre #WSocial.
Ya sabemos que usará #ATProtocol y será como una instancia de #Bluesky.
Pero les escribí para preguntar y parece que también permitirá migración de cuentas de Bluesky a W, incluyendo mensajes, seguidores, todo.
#ATProtocol
How cool is that? 📷🌎 Great work @polijan.bsky.social@bsky.brid.gy on atlas.atmo.pics! Really excited to see where this goes. #ATProtocol #ATGeo
@devingaffney.com and I have been working on some @graze.social@bsky.brid.gy labs features and I'm pretty happy with how my atmosphere feed has turned out. Definitely needs some tuning and there's a lot of room for improvement, but so far so good. #ATProtocol
RE: https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:cbkjy5n7bk3ax2wplmtjofq2/feed/atmosphere
[Sequoia: 오픈 웹을 위한 퍼블리싱 도구
Steve Simkins가 개발한 Sequoia는 기존 정적 사이트 블로그를 AT Protocol(Bluesky의 기반 프로토콜)에 쉽게 배포할 수 있는 CLI 도구로, 사용자 소유권과 제어권을 강조하는 오픈 웹 생태계 확장을 목표로 합니다. 주요 기능으로는 ATProto 핸들 인증, 블로그 설정 자동화, PDS(Personal Data Server)와의 동기화, 다양한 정적 사이트 제너레이터 호환 등이 있습니다.
正しくポストされているかの確認です。
ためし
これはstandard.siteに対してポストする記事のテストです。
Discord, Reddit, and Bluesky Cater to Sociopaths
Now that I’m back in the fediverse, I’m convinced that people who choose platforms with the culture of Twitter or Bluesky do so because they’re expected to conform to basic norms in the fediverse. I think there is a tacit understanding that behaving the way they do on Discord, Reddit, Bluesky, or Twitter will likely result in a swift suspension of their account, so they gravitate toward libertarian spaces. The irony is that they are there because of the lack of “global” level moderation, yet at the same time, they are upset that admins and moderators do not ban the people they want banned. Ironically, they criticize the very culture that allows them to exist there in the first place.
While typing this up, I was scrolling through the Bluesky hashtag on Mastodon and found this:
Bluesky issues its first transparency report, noting rise in user reports and legal demands
The first thing I did was look to see if this transparency report was required by law. Nope—it’s something that Bluesky is doing on its own, which means they think it’s in their interest to release this report. The report lists moderation as a major complaint, where it’s tacitly understood that they will probably release more “user moderation” tools and create more visibility algorithms that hide people who aren’t within your network or don’t share an affinity with you, effectively creating an echo chamber instead of banning people.
But the report actually substantiates the premise of this post. Outside of misinformation, the second largest complaint is harassment. So, outside of bots, the biggest issue people have on Bluesky is harassment. I operate a rather large botnet and have tested Bluesky’s system. Basically, Bluesky “hides” content within the thread at most and rarely suspends accounts that harass people. However, they will quickly, with prejudice, take down accounts they think are spam. I wrote a little bit about how that algorithm works.here:
I am serious. If you reply to someone’s post on BlueSky, they can report you for being “inauthentic,” and if there isn’t enough private data on your account to signal “authentic,” their system will suspend you. Google does something similar. Data about your life, experiences, behaviors, and so on is a factor in the signals many algorithms consider when classifying you as a real person or a bot. This goes way beyond the typical Bayesian classifiers used to evaluate if you are a spam bot.
BlueSky’s system feeds uses feature vectors of your posts into classification models, like decision trees, neural networks, or support vector machines, that have been trained on examples of both genuine and inauthentic accounts. The model looks at the entire vector holistically to decide if the account resembles a real user or a bot or spammer.
Signal extraction means pulling out meaningful patterns from raw data to use as features. BlueSky doesn’t just use raw activity logs; it processes them to extract signals that matter for classification. When people post about everyday events, like what they ate, where they went, or how their day was, it creates a pattern of human-like, spontaneous behavior. Bots or fake accounts usually cannot generate that kind of varied, genuine storytelling naturally or consistently.
Real users’ posts often reference real world contexts that fit together over time. For example, talking about going to work during weekdays, weekends with family, seasonal events, or ongoing hobbies. This continuity helps algorithms spot real human behavior versus random or scripted posts. So, when someone reports your account for being inauthentic and there isn’t enough information about your real world life, their system will label you a bot and suspend your account. This is actually the type of system they use to flag and suspend Palestinian accounts.
I am not going to lie, from the perspective of a developer, the AT protocol is more fun than the ActivityPub, so I like the nuts and bolts of all the data-driven algorithms, but the people are so fucking creepy and not fun. If they were creepy and fun, I might be over there and not on the fediverse. They are not fun because they are so fucking boring!
Bluesky and the AT protocol are very interesting from a technical perspective. I am not directly criticizing them; rather, I am saying that the social networks that move there do so because it is hospitable. Bluesky is a “choose your own algorithm” adventure. The idea was to have a marketplace of algorithms, so Bluesky takes a libertarian approach where moderation happens on a smaller, local level. For example, a person can create an algorithm for a moderation list that runs off their own PDS, which picks up users and posts that are hidden from everyone subscribed to that list. That is a libertarian setup, which gives abusive people—those who don’t care about consent—a place to be without being banned everywhere within a given app view.
Admins have more power in the fediverse because you are a guest on their server. I’ve noticed that the type of people who hang out on Reddit, Discord, or Bluesky often expect their boundaries to be respected while violating everyone else’s. Just about almost every scandal recently about Bluesky has been because of moderation issues, which is ironic, because the subset of marginalized people on Bluesky have not migrated to places like the fediverse because the fediverse is the HOA. Basically, they don’t like Mastodon’s cultural approach to moderation, but because of that approach, there are less abusive people like them.
The fediverse functions more like users having free rooms in someone else’s house than a corporate chain of apartment complexes. Most servers are run by individuals or small groups, not companies trying to scale or retain customers. This means users are guests rather than entitled tenants. Because of that, norms are enforced more directly. There’s a lower tolerance for behavior that makes the space uncomfortable.
For example, this is my instance. I could create an account on this instance for someone (any type of registration is disabled). However, if it got back to me that they were doing things I did not like, I could delete their account. They are a guest, not an entitled customer.
I think spaces that are locally run and properly moderated at a local level—outside of larger financial or political interests at macro levels—will always have fewer people. Many spaces on the Internet have an antisocial, hostile culture. In these spaces, persuasion via coercion, rather than consent or respect for autonomy, is the norm.
This documentation sidecar lexicon helps you make your lexicon accessible. We talk a lot, as a community, about "the atmosphere" and sometimes miss the point when we don't put thinking globally into action. #ATProtocol #Lexicon
RE: https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:akhgi4ekkeaupiqsis6g2gqg/post/3mdlswclffc2w
People Don’t Know How to Actually Have Conversations on Social Media
I think the major breakdown with microblogging is that people don’t actually want to have conversations. I honestly don’t know what the fuck people want, but they don’t want to have dialogues with people—that’s for certain. Microblogging is a format that was specifically designed around how dialogue works. You say something, a person responds, and then you respond to that. It is not a monologue. You tacitly, implicitly, or even explicitly invite others into the conversation.
Specifically, microblogging is intended to simulate a call-and-response interaction. My husband was a theater kid, and we met when he was doing Rocky Horror Picture Show stuff. Call-and-response is really big with that. My husband is now a stocky, gruff, Southern blue-collar guy, but when we first met, he was a theatre kid, lol.
With microblogging formats and protocols, the “call” is the post itself. It might be a statement, a question, or a quick observation. Someone might write, “I think cats are better than dogs,” ask, “What’s the best way to learn Python?” or just admit, “Just spilled coffee on my keyboard.” The visibility of the post makes it possible for others to react or respond.
The “response” is any reply to that post. It could be agreement (“Totally, cats rule!”) or disagreement (“Dogs are way better”). It could also add context (“You might like this cat trick video”) or include a personal aside (“I had the same accident last week!”). The important part is that the reply depends on the original post. Without the post, there’s nothing to respond to. This dependency is what makes the exchange conversational rather than standalone.
This is structurally intended to create a back-and-forth thread. One person posts, someone replies, and the original poster responds. Others may then jump in. A typical exchange might start with “I love cats more than dogs,” followed by “Really? Dogs are more loyal,” and then, “I get that, but cats are independent and funny.” Someone else might add, “Cats do have better personalities for small apartments.” That sequence—post, reply, counter-reply—is essentially how everyday conversation goes.
Nowadays, people often use microblogging platforms to rant incoherently. These rants usually focus on whatever crisis they are in or whatever thing they are outraged about today.
Then they turn around and complain that they are not getting engagement. It’s like going on a date with someone where they talk about themselves for the entire date. They ask you nothing about you and then get upset that you are not participating in a conversation about them that makes no room for you. The lack of engagement is because they are creating a space others cannot participate in. They’re not actually interested in speaking with people. They want affirmation and validation.
What prompted this was me going through a few people’s profiles on Mastodon and Bluesky. The norm is random, incoherent, incomprehensible bursts of rants, random political shares, and compulsive likes of porn. When people reply, there is no meaningful back-and-forth. On the reply side of things, people who weren’t implicitly invited to reply are ranting in other people’s threads. You have people who create multiple threads containing rambling rants that don’t prompt any type of engagement outside of maybe shares, and then you have people barging into others’ threads with a rant of their own, unprompted, because they were served the thread and compulsively had to reply.
The insane thing is that everyone ends up believing the solution is to create yet another social media platform that imports the same problematic cultural schema. I don’t know what people want—but they don’t want to speak with each other in a conversation, that’s for certain. They hate conversing with one another so much that they’d rather talk to LLMs.
For example, this is shared through a social networking protocol (i.e., ActivityPub) such that microblogging software can access it. However, I am using blogging software (i.e., WordPress), and this is a blog post. It’s tacitly not intended to be a dialogue, though there is an implicit invitation for comments. I myself am probably not interested in your responses or reactions. That is why this is a well-thought-out blog post and not me incoherently ranting about the news. I haven’t formed a parasocial relationship with every politician who is consequential to my life. Most largely influential people who engage with media as part of their profession aren’t handling their own social media. As a result, these unhinged people aren’t talking to whoever they think they are.
I think there is a mismatch between the specifications of the format and people’s expectations. Your dark night of the soul moments should go in a space that is meant for random, chaotic screaming.
Dear god, do you do anything but constantly bitch?! Why are you even on social media if you hate it so fucking much?!
A little bit about me. I am a Computer Scientist and I have recently had contracts for developing apps for both the AT protocol and The Activitypub protocol. I am saying this to get ahead of the annoying nerd culture of the fediverse.
I am going to be honest. I am tired of the bitching about Mastodon. You guys act as if you don’t have other options.
In 2023-2024, Zuck decided he would pull a google and subsume the fediverse. So he “federated” (but not really) with fediverse, allowing Threads users to READ what mastodon.social (ugh) server would show. Can’t TALK to fediverse users, just see their posts AND CONTENT (must… feed… LLM…). That was followed by a bunch of idiots following Dorsey, and his VC techbro funded “BlueSky” twitter-reborn. Sod as “DeCentrAliZed aND fReE”, it is centralized as fuck, EVERYTHING passes through their ONE cluster of servers, controlled by their choices. Even if you pay them tubes (no, seriously), and run a “hard” PSD server, you are still controlled (account, permissions) by central BS server. That douchebaggery also tried to subsume the fediverse, by “bridging” it. Same deal as Threads.
Now, the users of those are seeing the nazifying of both, and eyeballing the fediverse they can mostly read but not interact with, and getting buyer’s regret. BUT, they want to bring the bullshit they are used to along.
So we see “Starter Packs” talk, basically a large file containing thousands of accounts that are either available for download OR THAT THE INSTANCE PUSHES TO YOUR ACCOUNT AUTOMATICALLY. TL;DR they control the start of what you see and who you can read from and talk to… exactly like xitter, threads, linkedin, facebook, bluesky… all the Big Corp controlled platforms.
As an aside, I think it is duplicitous and disingenuous to post the above text I extracted as an image without a CW. First, it circumvents people’s filters. Second, it makes it harder to quote the text. So, I tacitly believe you’re operating in bad faith, and part of me thinks you are purposefully conflating Mastodon with the ActivityPub protocol in the same way it is common to conflate the Bluesky app view with ATmosphere. It kinda sounds like left-wing accelerationism to me, though I admit I might be reaching with that.
But yeah, this is exactly why I am self-hosting. Since this is my site, I can choose to defederate or federate with any other instance, provided they don’t defederate from me first. In my opinion, Mastodon consumes way too much of the fediverse, so for anyone who doesn’t like starter packs, I would recommend just not using Mastodon. I have been developing stuff on the AT Protocol for the last year, so I am a bit rusty on what’s going on the Starter Packs for Mastodon, but to my knowledge, it is not going to be protocol-specific. I could be wrong, so if I am, correct me and cite the technical documentation.
I am blunt because, like I said, I am tired of the constant bitching. If you don’t like starter packs, don’t use Mastodon. If you disagree with the federation decisions of an ActivityPub instance, find another one. And if you can’t find any run how you want, run your own. The issue is that you don’t want certain people here, so you can run your own instance and determine who you want there. I’m not the pot calling the kettle black because I own this, lol.
For example, I am not posting from Mastodon, lol. Mastodon is to ActivityPub as Bluesky is to the AT Protocol. ActivityPub and the AT Protocol were made for more than just microblogging, but because people have a tacit expectation that everything should plug into microblogging, here we are. Your points are valid, which is why I don’t use Mastodon and have my own instance. You’re not chained to Mastodon. See all the cool formatting tricks I’m able to do in this post and my unlimited character length. Yeah—that’s not Mastodon.
Edit:
I just looked into it. The “Fedipacks” are conceptually a directory, not a record. See here:
https://fedidevs.com/starter-packs
When you create a Starter Pack on Bluesky, the system writes a new record into the app.bsky.graph.starterpack field of a user’s repo, which is the decentralized data layer Bluesky is built on. This record lives inside a user’s personal AT Proto repository, just like posts, likes, follows, and lists. app.bsky.graph.starterpack represents the metadata for that Starter Pack: its name, description, included accounts, feeds, and other configuration details. Once created, it is addressable via an at:// URI and identified by a CID (content identifier), just like other AT Proto records. Here is an example:
The proposed “starter packs” for the fediverse and the starter packs for the AT Protocol would be implemented in totally different ways. From a very quick look at how Starter Packs in ActivityPub are supposed to work, the starter packs app is given permission to act as an actor on your behalf and follow accounts, which is entirely different from what happens with Bluesky. Y’all really need to cool it with the insane insular culture. All of that is besides the point: you just don’t want a particular group of people in the same networks as you. That’s fine. Spin up your own instance.
I don’t care either way about starter packs, because they are just explicit models of the implicit social connections people already have. It is not the starter packs that you have an issue with; it is the relationships and the culture that you have an issue with. You do not want people with social connections to other platforms here. Just say that. Again, I’m not a fan of Mastodon, so I am not using it to speak to you.
Your larger point is that you don’t want people of a particular type or culture over there, and you are not fond of Starter Packs because you believe they are a bridge. That is valid. So what you do is spin up your own instance, pick which servers you do or don’t federate with, and choose software that doesn’t implement those features. You’re essentially, tacitly telling administrators what to do in their own space when you can make your own space and invite or disinvite who you want.
For example, the Bluesky bridge and Threads are blocked for my site, so it doesn’t matter if another instance is federated with them. I’m not disagreeing with your main point. I’m saying you keep expecting people to conform to your judgments instead of setting up a space that fits your values, which is just wild to me.
I am just going to point out this setting right here:
That setting exists because most users on the fediverse do not want to be included in search results. Secondly, the fediverse has its own database. If you are someone who enjoys image board cultures with a Neocities vibe and you want to be discoverable, PinkSea or Wafrn—which have AT protocol services—might be better. I know for a fact that audience is on Bluesky, PinkSea, or Wafrn.
If you want to be indexed and would be on Neocities as an artist, you are more likely to be on Bluesky, PinkSea, or Wafrn (Wafrn is federated with the fediverse, too). You would probably not be on Mastodon. I am making a distinction between Mastodon, the fediverse, Bluesky, and the AT protocol. For example, Friendica and WordPress are not Mastodon. If you are on Mastodon, you probably do not want to be discoverable.
I am replying to you from my WordPress blog, and notice this:
I find it very interesting when people complain about discoverability, scalability, and virality on the Fediverse, even though most users don’t want that. Most users on the Fediverse do not want their posts to be indexed by DuckDuckGo or Bing.
I moonlight as a social media app developer and have my hand in a lot of subcultures. If you are an artist who wants discoverability and are within the niche NeoCities caters to, statistically speaking, you are on Bluesky, PinkSea, or Wafrn. There is a presumption of opting in with indexes on Mastodon. I know for a fact that many people who were on NeoCities jumped ship and are now on Wafrn because of drama going on there.
The horny shitposters who are into manga and anime and care about discoverability and being indexed are on Bluesky. By the way, there’s a shit ton of furry porn on my blog. I’m a furry. Most of the furries over here care about privacy, so they wouldn’t care about being delisted, considering there is a database for the Fediverse: https://fedidb.com/ .
ATproto: The Enshittification Killswitch That Enables Resonant Computing
bsky.app:
I have no idea what any of this means, but it sounds very exciting… 🍿 #ATProtocol [contains quote post or other embedded content]
I have no idea what any of this means, but it sounds very exciting… 🍿 #ATProtocol
RE: https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:ewvi7nxzyoun6zhxrhs64oiz/post/3mdgdjvmy2c2j
Ahora que para sorpresa de nadie la empresa conjunta estadounidense de #TikTok que la red social tuvo que crear para que no les bloquearan ha salido mal, mucha gente busca alternativas. De momento parece que hay dos que se posicionan:
Una es #UpScrolled, red social indie australiana creada por un desarrollador palestino-australiano.
La otra es #Skylight, que pese a ser de USA es una red social más abierta que usa el mismo #ATProtocol que #Bluesky.
No se menciona tanto, pero también está #Loops basada en #ActivityPub.
¿Conseguirá alguna de estas alternativas asentarse?
Bluesky is An Ontological Space for Sadomasochism, Trolling, & Schadenfreude
So, during the initial exodus from Twitter after it became X following Elon Musk’s purchase, many people left but kept their accounts, purposefully to bully, surveil, antagonize, and troll others. People—including me—moved to Bluesky, Mastodon, or both, and used their Twitter accounts purely for harassment and similar behavior. Essentially, X became the place you went to act like a dumpster fire. Because most people within occult niches are highly toxic, I tend to not only block them but also block anyone they follow for reasons I’m about to explain.
I really only use that account to criticize occulture, post nudes, or share YouTube videos. Since I’m aware of fed posting, I avoid commenting on political topics or anarchist discourse on the Clearnet. Keep that in mind. If you scroll through my profile, you’ll see me poking fun at chaotes, posting nudes, gushing about or complaining about my husband, sharing dating horror story YouTube videos, or pet grooming videos. If you look at my likes, you’ll only see gay porn, mathematics papers, engineering papers, etc. There’s no mention of anything political, especially genocides.
There was a person I’d never interacted with who was part of a starter pack for occultists. I blocked them. Then I woke up this morning to find I was added to this list:
Chomsky Honks
Genocide apologist posting cringe from a Starbucks as it burns down around them
So, with all that in mind, these occultists I’ve never interacted with added me to a list. I am neither invested in Bluesky nor strongly connected to their network, primarily because I block almost everyone on it and don’t ever look at any feeds whatsoever, including the Home, followers, or Discover feeds. Therefore, the posts I do interact with are from pockets of people way outside my network. It’s kind of like driving to the bathhouse in Atlanta from a small town in Bubbafuck, Georgia, because everyone in your small town is garbage. Same idea, ontologically.
Honestly, I don’t care, because I’ve mostly moved back to Mastodon and blog more.
What they’ve done is implicitly a form of defamation, because they feel slighted and justified in defaming someone they don’t know, simply because a stranger they’ve never spoken to blocked them. I tend to do a basic block on anyone who blocks me, because if you’ve decided you don’t want to see me, there’s probably no good-faith reason for us to engage in the future. It’s likely there’s some malicious intent later on. As you can see with this, I was correct.
So, in order for them to know I blocked them, they had to continuously check who had blocked them, and they believe people who block them should be punished through bullying. Since the description of the list doesn’t fit me, they retaliated out of malice. The idea behind these cliques is pretty simple: they feel threatened by anyone who rejects their normative statements because it means they are being rejected, and they view any form of dissent as an existential threat. As a result, they believe people who reject them, set boundaries, or dissent from the consensus of their culture need to be punished, and the AT protocol provides convenient tools for brigading. Ironically, these people are anti-fascist yet have a very Christian-like evangelical way of viewing the world. The lack of insight is pretty funny.
I’m the child of cult leaders and members with Cluster B personalities, so I’m not clutching my pearls, especially since I’m already set up elsewhere outside of Bluesky. They do not have the means to impose significant consequences on me, so I find it amusing. I genuinely find it funny how they eat each other. I’m not calling anyone to action—I’m just enjoying the fire.
This person wasn’t aware of who I was. We never interacted, and being added to a list that defames me happened directly after I blocked them without any prior interaction. I saw their account from the firehose and wasn’t algorithmically presented with it, meaning we’re not even in the same clique. Now, if they had said something like “spams hashtags, trolls, makes alts,” that would make sense.
When you look at it for what it is, they wanted to defame, disparage, and brigade—punitive actions because they interpreted a boundary as hostile. This is projection, as they are weaponizing a mechanism to enforce boundaries. Do I care? No. I’m just pointing out how it turned its predecessor, X, into what it is now. It became a place for people to harass others, not a space for genuine, good-faith discussions, connections, or even debates. That is not my interpretation.
Well, to anyone who knows, you might ask: Did they block you because you have a particular reputation? No. I am a Web 1.0 mage, so the networks I’m known in have roots and associations in the old forums. The occulture people who have fixated on me for years go all the way back to Wizard Forums, the psionics forums, the unsolved mystery forums, etc., from the early 2000s. If you’re a circa 2016 social media influencer mage, you probably wouldn’t know me—primarily because the moment I see you, I’ll block you. There’s also a moderation block list just for me and my alts.
This behavior is typical of the culture on Bluesky, so much so that it’s a common complaint people now have—many no longer view block lists as legitimate moderation tools. People are being advised to be skeptical of lists with a large number of people.
Oh, I’m not playing the victim here. I don’t care, because I could easily get back at them. I’m infamously vindictive and petty. More importantly, it supports my point and vindicates me. I’m not signaling victimhood; rather, I’m pointing out a culture, albeit one I participate in. Tying this back to my initial point: part of what signaled the death of Twitter as a serious forum and its transformation into X was the bullying. A while ago, I did a phylogenetic memetic analysis that basically showed how the culture on Bluesky is highly derivative of image boards. But don’t you bully and troll people? Yes, yes, I do – on Bluesky, and the lack of moderation and culture enable it. That’s my point.
Bluesky is an accelerationist and reactionary platform that gives you the tools to surveil and harass people. The developers of Bluesky and the AT Protocol have explicitly said they are technological accelerationists and libertarians. I’m not virtue signaling here; rather, I am saying Bluesky is a reactionary platform, so its culture should be understood as performative, hostile, and adversarial—not cooperative or collaborative. Just like Twitter. You can’t do what I do on Bluesky on the fediverse, because the culture won’t allow it.
You saw this type of behavior on Tumblr, where the population carrying the memetics of that culture migrated to Twitter and now Bluesky. Essentially, Bluesky became a place where malice, bullying, and hostile behavior became so normalized that I’m not even upset about lists being weaponized like this. For example, I’m not posting this on Bluesky, and I, myself, have bullied people on Bluesky. But I behave myself on Mastodon. I am using myself as an example. The trolling is happening on Bluesky. The thoughtful posts are happening on Mastodon. The blog this will be posted on is federated, so this is being posted to the fediverse.
That’s what happened to Twitter. It started normalizing hostile, toxic behavior, so that people left the platform and only returned to Twitter for schadenfreude. I have my own WordPress fediverse instance. I am just on Bluesky for the schadenfreude.
New Blog post: I go over decentralized social media protocols like #nostr #ATProtocol and #ActivityPub and compare the tradeoffs between them.
Why am I getting disconnected from the relay every 4 minutes? #ATProtocol
Client Info
Server: https://mastodon.social
Version: 2025.07
Repository: https://github.com/cyevgeniy/lmst