Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Darnell Clayton :verified: (darnell@one.darnell.one)'s status on Monday, 03-Nov-2025 04:56:11 JST Darnell Clayton :verified:

   Is Bluesky’s 🦋 Atmosphere Expanding Faster Than The Fediverse‽

   https://darnell.tv/2025/11/02/bluesky-atmosphere-fediverse-activitypub/

   • Embed this notice
     Darnell Clayton :verified: (darnell@one.darnell.one)'s status on Monday, 03-Nov-2025 05:02:52 JST Darnell Clayton :verified:

     in reply to

     • Rob Ricci

     @ricci Thanks! That is very insightful as it shows how distributed federated social networks are.

   • Embed this notice
     Rob Ricci (ricci@discuss.systems)'s status on Monday, 03-Nov-2025 05:02:53 JST Rob Ricci

     in reply to

     @darnell I've built another site to put numbers behind decentralization, too: https://arewedecentralizedyet.online/

   • Embed this notice
     Darnell Clayton :verified: (darnell@one.darnell.one)'s status on Monday, 03-Nov-2025 05:20:30 JST Darnell Clayton :verified:

     in reply to

     • fediverseobserver
     • Rob Ricci

     @ricci Yeah, I agree. I know of the 145 million Flipboard users, about 1200 (I think‽) have turned on Fediverse sharing, & those stats are thankfully included by @fediverseobserver (which makes it easier to measure).

     Threads being around 50,000 makes sense, as I doubt Meta would mention any stats under a million to the press (I wish they did for what it is worth).

   • Embed this notice
     Rob Ricci (ricci@discuss.systems)'s status on Monday, 03-Nov-2025 05:20:31 JST Rob Ricci

     in reply to

     @darnell For what it's worth: here is my argument with respect to including Threads in Fediverse numbers: we should only include the number of Threads users who have turned on ActivityPub integration (seems to be something like 50k, https://fediversereport.com/why-is-meta-adding-fediverse-interoperability-to-threads/ , which is incidentally about the same number of Fediverse users who have bridge dtheir accounts to atproto/atmopshere/bluesky via bridgy). Because: let's think about Google accounts. Some of them have direct access to "the SMTP network" via gmail. We should count those as email users. But there are also lots of Google accounts that do *not* have associated gmail address. Those have no connection to "the SMTP network", and we should not count them as "email users", at least not as "google email users". Same thing with Threads users and ActivityPub.

   • Embed this notice
     Rob Ricci (ricci@discuss.systems)'s status on Monday, 03-Nov-2025 05:20:32 JST Rob Ricci

     in reply to

     @darnell So much of the conversation tends to be without numbers, so I appreciate efforts, including yours, to include them!