Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Folker (folkerschamel@mastodon.social)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Sep-2025 02:56:59 JST Folker

   @mmasnick.bsky.social

   That's a deflection again. Nobody doubts that technically both #activitypub and #atproto support decentralization.

   But the point is that *in practice* basically all #bluesky users are concentrated on infrastructure of a single company under US jurisdiction, while #mastodon users are distributed over many servers in many jurisdictions all over the world.

   The consequences can be seen with Mississippi.

   https://mastodon.social/@ikuturso/115124768664434731

   https://mastodon.social/@mastodonmigration@mastodon.online/115125132980066617

   • Embed this notice
     Mastodon Migration (mastodonmigration@mastodon.online)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Sep-2025 02:56:58 JST Mastodon Migration

     in reply to

     @folkerschamel @mmasnick.bsky.social

     The technique Mike Masnick employs is to ignore the substance of the critique. #Bluesky may technically be capable of decentralization, but in practice it is still highly centralized. Instead, he repeats the mantra there are some examples of decentralization.

     Stipulated Mike.

     Now move on to addressing the reality that for all intents and purposes, which is what matters for these censorship issues, it is centralized.

     https://arewedecentralizedyet.online/

   • Embed this notice
     Mike Masnick ✅ (mmasnick@mastodon.social)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Sep-2025 02:56:58 JST Mike Masnick ✅

     in reply to

     • Mastodon Migration

     @mastodonmigration @folkerschamel @mmasnick.bsky.social I just saw this thanks to folker posting it (misleadingly) on Bluesky. As I've said repeatedly, that chart is not only meaningless, but it's misleading. If it included Threads on the AP side, then Mastodon would look way way worse. But that's silly. If it counted Threads would that suddenly make Mastodon less decentralized? Of course not. That's why that chart is completely meaningless.

   • Embed this notice
     Folker (folkerschamel@mastodon.social)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Sep-2025 07:56:22 JST Folker

     in reply to

     • Mike Masnick ✅
     • Mastodon Migration

     @mmasnick @mastodonmigration @mmasnick.bsky.social

     Nonsense.

     Of course, when considering #threads as a part of the #fediverse, then it's not #decentralized.

     But this does not change the fact that #mastodon is #decentralized. As is the #fediverse excluding #threads. As show nicely by the diagram.

     And of course all this does not change the fact that #bluesky is controlled by a single company. And that #atmosphere is centralized. As also shown nicely with the diagram.

   • Embed this notice
     Mike Masnick ✅ (mmasnick@mastodon.social)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Sep-2025 16:35:29 JST Mike Masnick ✅

     in reply to

     • Mastodon Migration

     @mastodonmigration @folkerschamel @mmasnick.bsky.social the only one misrepresenting stuff is you, unfortunately. Bluesky has done a ton of stuff to enable actual decentralization, all of which we're starting to see come into effect as we speak and all you guys do is lie about it.

     But you still ignore my point. If we (properly) counted Threads as part of the fediverse, would that make the fediverse less decentralized?

     Answer please.

   • Embed this notice
     Mastodon Migration (mastodonmigration@mastodon.online)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Sep-2025 16:35:30 JST Mastodon Migration

     in reply to

     • Mike Masnick ✅

     @mmasnick @folkerschamel @mmasnick.bsky.social

     This is a specious argument, and does not deserve a serious response. Please stop misrepresenting the current degree of centralized concentration of Bluesky PBC on AT Protocol. You are in a perfect position to advocate for actual meaningful decentralization, but instead continue to misrepresent the current overwhelming dominance of Bluesky PBC.

     1/

   • Embed this notice
     Mastodon Migration (mastodonmigration@mastodon.online)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Sep-2025 16:35:30 JST Mastodon Migration

     in reply to

     • Mike Masnick ✅

     @mmasnick @folkerschamel @mmasnick.bsky.social

     Rather than making false and misleading arguments you could instead stipulate that the overwhelming dominance Bluesky PBC does currently make AT Protocol a defacto centralized network, but the company recognizes this and are taking specific steps to address it. AT Protocol is designed to facilitate decentralization and list what steps are being taken, against what metrics to achieve real decentralization.

     2/

   • Embed this notice
     Mastodon Migration (mastodonmigration@mastodon.online)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Sep-2025 16:35:30 JST Mastodon Migration

     in reply to

     • Mike Masnick ✅

     @mmasnick @folkerschamel @mmasnick.bsky.social

     Specifically, what is the company doing to enable independent instances and provide the type of choice your marketing ballyhoos? What are your goals for achieving a meaningful percentage of the AT Protocol network users NOT being Bluesky PBC users? What programs are you sponsoring to achieve these ends? Are you serious about these goals?

     3/

   • Embed this notice
     Mike Masnick ✅ (mmasnick@mastodon.social)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Sep-2025 16:37:05 JST Mike Masnick ✅

     in reply to

     • Mastodon Migration

     @folkerschamel @mastodonmigration @mmasnick.bsky.social you are lying. Stop doing so. The Atmosphere is not centralized, is not controlled by a single company any more than Meta controls the fediverse.

     I don't understand why you keep lying. It's shameful behavior and you should stop.

   • Embed this notice
     Folker (folkerschamel@mastodon.social)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Sep-2025 17:09:25 JST Folker

     in reply to

     • Mike Masnick ✅
     • Mastodon Migration

     @mmasnick @mastodonmigration @mmasnick.bsky.social

     "enable" actual decentralization ... "lie about" ... here we are again ... Since I wouldn't be able to resist the temptation to respond with another biting meme reiterating https://mastodon.online/@mastodonmigration/115129998343856795, probably showing that the latest version of https://arewedecentralizedyet.online/ even shows more centralization .... this time I leave it to you to responde 😉

   • Embed this notice
     Folker (folkerschamel@mastodon.social)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Sep-2025 17:18:22 JST Folker

     in reply to

     • Mike Masnick ✅
     • Mastodon Migration
     • Rob Ricci

     @mmasnick @mastodonmigration @mmasnick.bsky.social

     Hey Rob @ricci

     Since I wouldn't be able to resist the temptation to respond with another biting meme reiterating https://mastodon.online/@mastodonmigration/115129998343856795, pointing out again that *enabling* is not the same as *having*, maybe noting that the latest version of https://arewedecentralizedyet.online/ shows even more centralization than a few days ago, I won't do that 😉 .... this time I leave it to you to responde to @mmasnick.bsky.social 😉

   • Embed this notice
     Folker (folkerschamel@mastodon.social)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Sep-2025 17:19:29 JST Folker

     in reply to

     • Mike Masnick ✅
     • Mastodon Migration
     • Rob Ricci

     @mmasnick @mastodonmigration @mmasnick.bsky.social

     Hey Rob @ricci

     Since I wouldn't be able to resist the temptation to respond with another biting meme, pointing out again that *enabling* is not the same as *having*, maybe noting that the latest version of https://arewedecentralizedyet.online/ shows even more centralization than a few days ago, and reiterating https://mastodon.online/@mastodonmigration/115129998343856795 - I won't do that 😉 .... this time I leave it to you to responde to @mmasnick.bsky.social 😉

   • Embed this notice
     Folker (folkerschamel@mastodon.social)'s status on Tuesday, 09-Sep-2025 17:32:52 JST Folker

     in reply to

     • Mike Masnick ✅
     • Mastodon Migration
     • Rob Ricci

     @mmasnick @mastodonmigration @mmasnick.bsky.social
     @ricci

     No, I'm not saying that #atmosphere is controlled by a single company.

     I'm just pointing out that right now #atmosphere is centralized in practice in the sense that it consists basically exclusively of infrastructure controlled by #bluesky PBC.

     Do I understand you currectly that you are comparing #bluesky to #meta?

   • Embed this notice
     Mike Masnick ✅ (mmasnick@mastodon.social)'s status on Wednesday, 10-Sep-2025 16:20:22 JST Mike Masnick ✅

     in reply to

     • Mastodon Migration
     • Rob Ricci

     @mastodonmigration @folkerschamel @mmasnick.bsky.social @ricci No @ricci is making a different (totally valid!) point. I am saying IF he included Threads, would you then say that Mastodon is less decentralized?

     That's the only question I am asking. If your answer is yes, I would be confused. If your answer is no, you are admitting that this is not a measure of decentralization.

     Which is it?

   • Embed this notice
     Mastodon Migration (mastodonmigration@mastodon.online)'s status on Wednesday, 10-Sep-2025 16:20:23 JST Mastodon Migration

     in reply to

     • Mike Masnick ✅
     • Rob Ricci

     @mmasnick @folkerschamel @mmasnick.bsky.social

     @mmasnick

     @ricci did answer your question very specifically here:

     https://discuss.systems/@ricci/115171236116610436

     There was also more in depth discussion of the issue. It may be that you are not seeing the entire thread across the bridge.

   • Embed this notice
     Folker (folkerschamel@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 11-Sep-2025 11:57:45 JST Folker

     in reply to

     • Mike Masnick ✅
     • Mastodon Migration
     • Rob Ricci

     @ricci @mmasnick @mastodonmigration @mmasnick.bsky.social

     But even if all of #threads would be part of the #fediverse and make the fediverse practically centralized, it wouldn't change the the factual situation that
     a) #mastodon is #decentralized,
     b) #bluesky as being controlled by a single company is completely centralized, and
     c) #atmosphere as being dominated by #bluesky is practically centralized.

   • Embed this notice
     Mike Masnick ✅ (mmasnick@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 11-Sep-2025 11:57:45 JST Mike Masnick ✅

     in reply to

     • Mastodon Migration
     • Rob Ricci

     @folkerschamel @ricci @mastodonmigration @mmasnick.bsky.social the thing is, multiple people have explained to you, repeatedly, that your point "b" is incorrect. ATproto/Atmosphere is NOT controlled by a single company. Why you keep repeating that lie is the part that bugs me.

   • Embed this notice
     Rob Ricci (ricci@discuss.systems)'s status on Thursday, 11-Sep-2025 11:57:46 JST Rob Ricci

     in reply to

     • Mike Masnick ✅
     • Mastodon Migration

     @mmasnick @mastodonmigration @folkerschamel @mmasnick.bsky.social Of course, it does not. It has like 50k.

   • Embed this notice
     Rob Ricci (ricci@discuss.systems)'s status on Thursday, 11-Sep-2025 11:57:47 JST Rob Ricci

     in reply to

     • Mike Masnick ✅
     • Mastodon Migration

     @mmasnick @mastodonmigration @folkerschamel @mmasnick.bsky.social I think a better question here, Mike is *if* Threads had 400M users who were active on the fediverse, would the fediverse be more centralized?

     I would say yes.

   • Embed this notice
     Mike Masnick ✅ (mmasnick@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 11-Sep-2025 11:58:44 JST Mike Masnick ✅

     in reply to

     • Mastodon Migration
     • Rob Ricci

     @ricci @mastodonmigration @folkerschamel @mmasnick.bsky.social I disagree. I don't think it would be any less decentralized. Arguably, I would say it's more decentralized because it would have more users who *can* move elsewhere while remaining in touch.

   • Embed this notice
     Mike Masnick ✅ (mmasnick@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 11-Sep-2025 13:21:31 JST Mike Masnick ✅

     in reply to

     • Mastodon Migration
     • Rob Ricci

     @ricci @folkerschamel @mastodonmigration @mmasnick.bsky.social fair enough, but then he is comparing apples to oranges. i was trying to make sure we were comparing like to like. if you just say "bluesky" then I could jus say "mastodon gmbh" and we are in the same camp. Both have some servers that they control. But they are both part of wider ecosystems. So Folker is either extremely confused or is deliberately misleading.

   • Embed this notice
     Rob Ricci (ricci@discuss.systems)'s status on Thursday, 11-Sep-2025 13:21:33 JST Rob Ricci

     in reply to

     • Mike Masnick ✅
     • Mastodon Migration

     @mmasnick @folkerschamel @mastodonmigration @mmasnick.bsky.social

     I am not a fan of this guy's style of engagement but I do feel the need to point out that his point b literally does not say what your reply says it does.

   • Embed this notice
     Folker (folkerschamel@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 11-Sep-2025 15:37:23 JST Folker

     in reply to

     • Eugen Rochko
     • Mike Masnick ✅
     • Mastodon Migration
     • Rob Ricci

     @mmasnick @ricci @mastodonmigration @mmasnick.bsky.social

     It's more than "fair enough" - you were spreading untrue things about other people's posts to your followers multiple times now, not only about my post but also posts of others like @Gargron, without ever sending out a correction.

     Yes, of course "mastodon gmbh" is centralized. But this doesn't invalidate anything I said in my post or make it misleading.

   • Embed this notice
     Rob Ricci (ricci@discuss.systems)'s status on Friday, 12-Sep-2025 11:19:53 JST Rob Ricci

     in reply to

     • Mike Masnick ✅
     • Mastodon Migration

     @folkerschamel @mmasnick @mastodonmigration @mmasnick.bsky.social

     In terms of "credible exit" Bluesky has made some moderation decisions in the last day that have made a set of people mad and (anecdotally) as I result I just saw a of people move to the fediverse from there, so maybe that is the future of credible exit. :)

     They can still bridge, and fed.brid.gy currently hosts more than half of the accounts on the Atmosphere that are on non-Bluesky PDSes.

   • Embed this notice
     Folker (folkerschamel@mastodon.social)'s status on Friday, 12-Sep-2025 11:19:54 JST Folker

     in reply to

     • Mike Masnick ✅
     • Mastodon Migration
     • Rob Ricci

     @ricci @mmasnick @mastodonmigration @mmasnick.bsky.social

     Yes, agreed that fediblock is a text book example how decentralization works well in practice.

     Well, then #bluesky credible exit is the same as decentralization support of #atproto: cool tech, nice theory, clever marketing trick, but largely irrelevant in reality. Btw, #twitter has a credible exit too: just export your data and import it into something new.😉

     PS: any chance of an explanation of
     https://mastodon.social/@folkerschamel/115184281756139935 ?

   • Embed this notice
     Rob Ricci (ricci@discuss.systems)'s status on Friday, 12-Sep-2025 11:19:54 JST Rob Ricci

     in reply to

     • Mike Masnick ✅
     • Mastodon Migration

     @folkerschamel @mmasnick @mastodonmigration @mmasnick.bsky.social

     I think the contention here is that Mastodon GMBH is to the Fediverse as Bluesky PBC is to the Atmosphere: both individual companies develop software, run services with users, and participate in a larger ecosystem that they don't control[*]. Each company can be called a "central" entity, and the whole can be said to contain parts that are outside that center. This is the point that I understand Mike to be making that he thinks you are missing or confused about.

     At some level, this is correct. But I think think this is a very shallow reading. If you look at the actual structure of these networks, they are very different. A large majority of the Fediverse is not subject to Mastodon GMBH's operational decisions (TOS, federation decisions, etc. ). There are other projects that rival the software produced by Mastodon GMBH in both scope and userbase. The pressures that shape the Fediverse are much larger *outside* of Mastodon GMBH that the ones that come from the company. There are tens of thousands of people in the Fediverse who, for better or worse, are social network administrators. Decisions are made by a huge set of people. atproto envisions a world where these things *could* happen - but so far as I know none of them are true of it today.

     I think it is a major mistake to gloss over these differences.

     [*] I think we will all concede that Bluesky does currently have significant control over the larger ecosystem through its control over atproto, but I am willing to give them the assumption of good faith in terms of handing off that control; they've started, and I assume they will complete the process.

     Rich Felker repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     Folker (folkerschamel@mastodon.social)'s status on Friday, 12-Sep-2025 11:19:55 JST Folker

     in reply to

     • Mike Masnick ✅
     • Mastodon Migration
     • Rob Ricci

     @ricci @mmasnick @mastodonmigration @mmasnick.bsky.social

     To add, I think the credible exit argument falls apart in reality anyway. See reality check Mississippi blocking: Many people on bluesky seem to not like the decision, but at the same time I have seen nobody acting on it and moving to services that make a different decision.

     BTW, using a different analysis only 7% of the fediverse seem to be known to block #threads, down from 9% last year, see also https://mastodon.social/@folkerschamel/111612927848322776.

   • Embed this notice
     Rob Ricci (ricci@discuss.systems)'s status on Friday, 12-Sep-2025 11:19:55 JST Rob Ricci

     in reply to

     • Mike Masnick ✅
     • Mastodon Migration

     @folkerschamel @mmasnick @mastodonmigration @mmasnick.bsky.social

     Interesting post, thanks. I didn't cross-check the fedipact data against another source, that's probably part of our discrepancy, but the data from them does add up to about 900k MAU, so I don't know why it's such a big discrepancy. Anyway, we agree that this represents highly-decentralized decision making in action, right?

     I think I'm more optimistic about credible exit than you are, part of the goal is not just that people will move, but that it will discourage individual platforms from taking actions that will piss users off. That said, I think it absolutely does not *guarantee* decentralization or user-positive behavior. The web search market has great credible exit, yet Google is staying around 90% (depending on source) even while making a lot of people quite angry about various things.

   • Embed this notice
     Rob Ricci (ricci@discuss.systems)'s status on Friday, 12-Sep-2025 11:19:56 JST Rob Ricci

     in reply to

     • Mike Masnick ✅
     • Mastodon Migration

     @folkerschamel @mmasnick @mastodonmigration @mmasnick.bsky.social

     Here's an illustration of the difference (in agreement with your basic point).

     Threads is currently blocked by servers representing 31% of Fediverse MAU and muted by another 2.5%. (Data from https://fedipact.veganism.social/ )

     That's the independent decisions of 3,280 instances. Several thousand others chose to federate.

     Let's say the atmosphere had the same decision to make. One organization's decision re: whether or not Thread's PDSes on their relay would affect >99% of atmosphere users.

     Mike will probably say that Bluesky might fragment, with people who don't like its decision, whichever way it goes, moving to services that make a different decision. Yes, it might. And they would get to take their data with them, which is great, and they can still communicate with the people who stay behind.

     But I gotta say, these seem to me like very different decision making processes with respect to whether power is held centrally or distributed to independent actors.

   • Embed this notice
     Rob Ricci (ricci@discuss.systems)'s status on Friday, 12-Sep-2025 11:19:57 JST Rob Ricci

     in reply to

     • Mike Masnick ✅
     • Mastodon Migration

     @folkerschamel @mmasnick @mastodonmigration @mmasnick.bsky.social

     Centralization is not binary the way you're presenting it here.

     Let's say we have a 400M-user Threads and a 1M-user Mastodon. If they defederate or Threads dies, Mastodon users loose access to 99.8% of the people they could communicate with. Ouch. But Mastodonians still have 1M people in their network so maybe it'll survive. Definitely not certain, though, that's a big cut. That's why I say a version of the Fediverse with 400M actual federated Threads users would be quite centralized.

     Now, people on one side may not actually give a shit about communicating with people on the other side. Fine, the people in both networks are not gaining a lot from federation. This seems to be more or less the status of most of the Fediverse and Threads, and why I think the correct thing to do is count the number of Threads users who have actually turned on federation, not the rest of them. If they defederate (as a lot of the Fediverse has done already), not a lot of connections are cut. This is why the existence of Threads does not increase the centralization the Fediverse today. This could, of course, change. This is why one should *keep* counting the number of Threads users who federate.

     Now, let's do this for Bluesky and Blacksky (in its role as a PDS, appview, and maybe soon relay). If, today, they split (say, the Bluesky relay stops talking to the Blacksky PDS and appview) or Bluesky dies, the 718 people on the BlackSky PDS lose access to the 38M people on the Bluesky PDSes: 99.999% of the people in the network. Again, maybe people on Blacksky could care less about people on Bluesky. But, given the even vaster difference in size, I'd wager that Blacksky users are pretty strongly interconnected with Bluesky users. And again, maybe this changes; in the week I've been watching, the number of users on the Blacksky PDS has gone up by about 200. Maybe it continues to grow and gets a lot bigger, that would change the dynamic. So again, this is why it's worth measuring and watching.

   • Embed this notice
     Folker (folkerschamel@mastodon.social)'s status on Friday, 12-Sep-2025 11:19:57 JST Folker

     in reply to

     • Mike Masnick ✅
     • Mastodon Migration
     • Rob Ricci

     @ricci @mmasnick @mastodonmigration @mmasnick.bsky.social

     I didn't present it binary - I deliberately chose the words "completely centralized" versus "practically centralized" versus "decentralized".

     And while of course centralization is not binary, and there are many discussions about details and about the future, we should not muddle the water and forget the overall big picture that for all practical purposes today bluesky is centralized and mastodon is decentralized.