Seems like even the big brains at Reddit's techie groups don't really have a great handle on what BlueSky is really about. Like it's just a glorified ActivityPub/Mastodon but "blah blah blockchain." I don't get it at all rn, like, I just see it as Usenet but with graphics in these early, relatively uninformed (for me) stages. But yes, I signed up for the beta. You know, because.
Me, I wouldn't buy a bar of chocolate from Jack Dorsey. I wouldn't take a FREE one from him.
@mcfate - Even if there was a creamy caramel filling? π€
Not from a guy who meditates in a cave in a third-world country while paying no attention to the civil war going on right outside, no.
I've got SOME standards.
@mcfate - You mean Dorsey? I have no idea what that dude is on about these days. Like, how long does he think that $13 million seed money is going to last if BlueSky's going to "save the internet?"
I think he's a f--king kook, but BlueSky will happen, just watch.
Lots of things "happen", I pay attention to few of them, and the majority never go anywhere.
@mcfate - On face it's like he's more concerned with verifying users/posts through blockchain than actually improving social media discourse. In my first book I talked about how blockchain would help improve social media in the future by shutting down bots and sockpuppets. I'd welcome that even if it were Dorsey doing it, but I suspect that slowly but surely BlueSky will have to become a corporatized, overly net-nannied dump like Twitter/FB.
Okay, my general position is that if your answer involves a blockchain, you're asking very much the wrong sorts of questions.
Take away "proof of work", and a blockchain is just a git repo in a prom dress.
@mcfate - They'd need real quantum computers, not the fake ones some companies are pushing, which use traditional binary bits. We're about 10 years away from the real thing, in my estimation.
@esaeger
It'll NEVER see "massive everyday use", you'd have to devote the world's energy supply to it.