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 - Imo blockchain won't even be real blockchain wrt widespread everyday use in massive systems like FB or Amazon etc until the mining is done through actual quantum computers. The energy waste is stratospheric.
It'll NEVER see "massive everyday use", you'd have to devote the world's energy supply to it.