Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Jan Wildeboer 😷:krulorange: (jwildeboer@social.wildeboer.net)'s status on Saturday, 24-Feb-2024 03:48:46 JST Jan Wildeboer 😷:krulorange:

   #UnpopularOpinion: #Bluesky isn't "opening #federation" with the release of their PDS (Personal Data Server) [1]. They are pushing storage costs and traffic to users. That's all. You still need the proprietary, centralised relay to move content from/to users.

   [1] https://github.com/bluesky-social/pds

   • Embed this notice
     Jan Wildeboer 😷:krulorange: (jwildeboer@social.wildeboer.net)'s status on Saturday, 24-Feb-2024 03:48:41 JST Jan Wildeboer 😷:krulorange:

     in reply to

     • Pieselpriemel

     @pieselpriemel What I don't like about the BlueSky way of PDS is that they create their own thing. SolidPod [1],[2] is out there. It's an Open Standard. (and I am sure there are many other well-meant solutions). What we really need though is less choice and more usage :) I don't want to lock-in my data/content to a single-use solution, as PDS does. I'd love to have SolidPod support for ActivityPub content storage. One can dream :)

     [1] https://solidproject.org/TR/protocol
     [2] https://solidproject.org

   • Embed this notice
     Jan Wildeboer 😷:krulorange: (jwildeboer@social.wildeboer.net)'s status on Saturday, 24-Feb-2024 03:48:44 JST Jan Wildeboer 😷:krulorange:

     in reply to

     • Pieselpriemel

     @pieselpriemel A few things. But the main one: I actually *like* the PDS (personal Data Server) approach and wished it would exist in the ActivityPub world too. Note that the ActivityPub protocol does not demand that content is stored at an instance under the control if an admin I (have to) trust.

     #BlueSky #Mastodon #ActivityPub #DataOwnership

     13 barn owls in a trenchcoat repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     Pieselpriemel (pieselpriemel@mastodon.de)'s status on Saturday, 24-Feb-2024 03:48:45 JST Pieselpriemel

     in reply to

     @jwildeboer What is unpopular about that opinion?