Good job I guess? At this point I think Bluesky is substantially better because you don't need to log in to view the posts of other people although the federation isn't complete yet, it does...
Good job I guess? At this point I think Bluesky is substantially better because
you don't need to log in to view the posts of other people
although the federation isn't complete yet, it does appear that their model scales better than Mastodon
the right wing trolls aren't on Bluesky yet (although with time I imagine they will join)
anyone can create an algorithmic feed, you can pin as many different ones as you want and browse them at your leisure blocking someone fully removes them completely from your view, everywhere, no...
anyone can create an algorithmic feed, you can pin as many different ones as you want and browse them at your leisure
blocking someone fully removes them completely from your view, everywhere, no exceptions
shared block lists allow you to easily en-masse block trolls, engagement farmers, bots, etc
Your block also blocks you from their view, meaning that harassment campaigns that can be started with a quote post are cut off short. Fewer people take a post a screenshot than Quote Post, and...
Your block also blocks you from their view, meaning that harassment campaigns that can be started with a quote post are cut off short. Fewer people take a post a screenshot than Quote Post, and fewer people still will search up the users than will click through to harass directly.
Even accidental harassment (where a big name QPs a regular person and accidentally causes a negative impact) is cut off with this.
I've been reading about the feed functionality, and I really like how open it is. You can write an application that subscribes to the firehose of new posts, then you essentially publish a list of...
I've been reading about the feed functionality, and I really like how open it is. You can write an application that subscribes to the firehose of new posts, then you essentially publish a list of posts that will be included in the feed, and people can add the feed to their BlueSky account. It appears along the top, right next to the Subscribed and Discover tabs.
Whatever you do to filter the posts you include is entirely up to you. If you want to only select posts that have an image, process the image and ensure it's mostly purple, nobody's stopping you. If you want to do natural language processing and only match posts that seem to be movie reviews with a positive sentiment, go right ahead.
A while ago I was listening to On the Media, and they were talking about what a terrible person Elon Musk is and how much worse Twitter has become since he bought it but how they were still on it...
A while ago I was listening to On the Media, and they were talking about what a terrible person Elon Musk is and how much worse Twitter has become since he bought it but how they were still on it because journalists were there and it made it an important tool for them. And it really pissed me off. If they want things to change, they need to be the change they want to be in the world. They need to reach out to all the journalists and get them to move somewhere else. They don’t need to be 100% successful in getting them all off; the more people they can get out the less attractive it is for everyone else to use X, and the more likely they are to leave. It turns out that someone has to make a move in order for a movement to happen.
Yeah, I mean. I'm basically finding both to be a bit shit these days - Twitter and Bluesky. I've done maybe 10-20 starter packs on Bluesky, and a number of folks that I specifically wanted to...
Yeah, I mean. I'm basically finding both to be a bit shit these days - Twitter and Bluesky. I've done maybe 10-20 starter packs on Bluesky, and a number of folks that I specifically wanted to find.
I'm struck by the difference in the two feeds. Over time, I added more and more organizations to my followed list on Twitter. So, right now, when I look at Twitter, it's a lot of orgs and people that work at orgs. Whereas right now, my Bluesky is a lot of individuals and very few orgs.
Both are fine, I guess. But so little of my identity is tied up in Twitter / social media. It's there, and I really appreciate not looking at it all the time.
I wish a few of the individual journalists, whose opinions I respect, were on Bluesky. But, also, I'm just kind of acknowledging that the internet isn't the same community that it used to be. There's a nostalgia there that's, like most nostalgia, not based fully in the nitty gritty reality. But yeah. Neither of these platforms are inherently good. They're both there to make money off of my use. If it's free, you're the product.
A big part of recent conversation among journalists and other people that make their own content on other sites is that X severely punishes posts that contain links, showing them to fewer people,...
A big part of recent conversation among journalists and other people that make their own content on other sites is that X severely punishes posts that contain links, showing them to fewer people, whereas Bluesky does not. This has been something a lot of the journalists I follow on Bluesky have been talking about as a really important reason to switch. After all, if one platform punishes you for linking to your own articles and the other doesn't, there's a utilitarian reason to use one over the other if even part of your goal is directing people to your actual journalistic work.
Good job I guess? At this point I think Bluesky is substantially better because
They have a much more effective block function than X
Yeah I mean, that'll kill a "platform". I've never understood that decision.
Your block also blocks you from their view, meaning that harassment campaigns that can be started with a quote post are cut off short. Fewer people take a post a screenshot than Quote Post, and fewer people still will search up the users than will click through to harass directly.
Even accidental harassment (where a big name QPs a regular person and accidentally causes a negative impact) is cut off with this.
I imagine there will be a whole ecosystem of people maintaining high-quality blocklists for the public good, if there isn't already
There is!
I've been reading about the feed functionality, and I really like how open it is. You can write an application that subscribes to the firehose of new posts, then you essentially publish a list of posts that will be included in the feed, and people can add the feed to their BlueSky account. It appears along the top, right next to the Subscribed and Discover tabs.
Whatever you do to filter the posts you include is entirely up to you. If you want to only select posts that have an image, process the image and ensure it's mostly purple, nobody's stopping you. If you want to do natural language processing and only match posts that seem to be movie reviews with a positive sentiment, go right ahead.
A while ago I was listening to On the Media, and they were talking about what a terrible person Elon Musk is and how much worse Twitter has become since he bought it but how they were still on it because journalists were there and it made it an important tool for them. And it really pissed me off. If they want things to change, they need to be the change they want to be in the world. They need to reach out to all the journalists and get them to move somewhere else. They don’t need to be 100% successful in getting them all off; the more people they can get out the less attractive it is for everyone else to use X, and the more likely they are to leave. It turns out that someone has to make a move in order for a movement to happen.
Yeah, I mean. I'm basically finding both to be a bit shit these days - Twitter and Bluesky. I've done maybe 10-20 starter packs on Bluesky, and a number of folks that I specifically wanted to find.
I'm struck by the difference in the two feeds. Over time, I added more and more organizations to my followed list on Twitter. So, right now, when I look at Twitter, it's a lot of orgs and people that work at orgs. Whereas right now, my Bluesky is a lot of individuals and very few orgs.
Both are fine, I guess. But so little of my identity is tied up in Twitter / social media. It's there, and I really appreciate not looking at it all the time.
I wish a few of the individual journalists, whose opinions I respect, were on Bluesky. But, also, I'm just kind of acknowledging that the internet isn't the same community that it used to be. There's a nostalgia there that's, like most nostalgia, not based fully in the nitty gritty reality. But yeah. Neither of these platforms are inherently good. They're both there to make money off of my use. If it's free, you're the product.
A big part of recent conversation among journalists and other people that make their own content on other sites is that X severely punishes posts that contain links, showing them to fewer people, whereas Bluesky does not. This has been something a lot of the journalists I follow on Bluesky have been talking about as a really important reason to switch. After all, if one platform punishes you for linking to your own articles and the other doesn't, there's a utilitarian reason to use one over the other if even part of your goal is directing people to your actual journalistic work.
I've seen right-wing trolls. But they're not too common.