Kinda infuriating that BlueSky forces people to login to see posts...😒
I bridge and get punished for bridging because half of the posts are replying to posts I can't see...😑
Kinda infuriating that BlueSky forces people to login to see posts...😒
I bridge and get punished for bridging because half of the posts are replying to posts I can't see...😑
@BeAware They decided unlike Mastodon they were going to do everything on a wide-open broadcast model, and then it turned out their users really really did not want a wide-open broadcast model and wanted Mastodon-style data containment, and so they bodged in some data containment but because it was added thoughtlessly after the fact it doesn't work cleanly like the Mastodon equivalent does :(
@frumble @BeAware @mho It wasn't really something that Bluesky wanted to add, it's just that it was locked behind a login wall at first and some people got used to this, and when they said they would allow viewing posts without a login, some people protested - and eventually to satisfy them, they added this setting where you can hide your profile & posts from public viewing on bsky.app. But they're still all visible in the API and through other tools.
@BeAware @mho It’s almost as if #Bluesky doesn’t want you to un-silo its pseudo-federated social network? 🤔
@BeAware that’s up to the poster; users can choose whether their posts are globally visible or gated behind a login
@BeAware @mcc Some instances show nothing at all if you're not signed in. Whatever mechanism they use, the result is the same as those other sites that require login.
@BeAware @mansr At the protocol level, what I'm referring to is that in general *servers do not receive statuses unless at least 1 user on that server is authorized to receive it*. If users are on megainstances like m.s or threads, this doesn't provide much containment. But when people use smaller instances, it does help. (And also the large instances are bigger legal targets so the admins might be less likely to violate privacy policies.) BSKY was originally designed as an open global broadcast
@BeAware @mansr I *was* thinking about restricted-distribution posts such as followers only posts or DMs.
I know authorized_fetch exists but not the details. It does seem to me that "but the admin can choose to make posts *additionally* visible via web" is somewhat orthogonal to what the base network does and doesn't allow for. Users who want web privacy technically *can* choose an authorized-fetch-only, no-web instance.
I do not know how DMs are sent in bluesky. They are a new-ish feature.
@BeAware @mansr It seems doubtful to me that "followers only" posts will ever be possible on bluesky. That is a legitimately useful feature that is important to certain people I know.
@BeAware @mansr All I know is that using my baseline Mastodon instance I run into authorized_fetch posts I can't view in web fairly often.
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.