I imagine the quick growth of open source blocking filters that bluesky will block because they can't monetize it.
It would additionally be blocked because the teams managing open source moderation would be seen to have too much control over bluesky users.
This also directly means that I'd pay to use the site and ALSO pay to make the site useful.
@RileyNorman @sc_griffith isn't the whole point of the design to have pluggable moderation?
I don't understand where the idea that they would block popular open source moderation algorithms comes from.
@WomanCorn @sc_griffith So ultimately, Bluesky will be charging me to use their site (I imagine via advertising) and then charging me through their “marketplace of algorithms” to make the site useable. Just what every site wants, to charge absolutely everyone using it.
I realize that there will be handwaving about decentralization and alternate implementations but all of that is vaporware as far as I'm concerned. It doesn't yet exist and I don't buy advertised hope.
@RileyNorman @sc_griffith Oh, will they be hosting the processing? I hadn't heard that.
My understanding was that there was going to be a standard feed format and that algorithms would just produce that, but run on their own infrastructure.
@WomanCorn @sc_griffith
It's large amounts of data processing and at those potential scales it adds up fast and again, as of yet I see no decentralization.
I'll be honest, I think the biggest problem is that it was promoted to take advantage of Twitter's problems too early in its lifecycle. Now there are a bunch of claims without anything to really back them up and from code that is, as far as I can tell, controlled by a private company at this time. They could have funded a non-profit but...
@WomanCorn @sc_griffith It's not that I don't think they can deliver, it's that I wouldn't trust the claims of a for-profit that isn't actually fulfilling those claims anywhere and it doesn't help that they appear to be hunting users instead of a product which leads me to believe that users are the product.
I'll have to admit that I'm a bit pessimistic with tech anymore.
@RileyNorman @sc_griffith they're a Public Benefit LLC. Those are pretty new, I'm not sure if they work well or not.
Of course, corruption in traditional nonprofits is common enough.
@WomanCorn @sc_griffith I saw that and took a glance. It's supposed to help CEOs take public benefit into consideration over investors. I'm no expert but It's still a for profit organization. Honestly, I saw that and thought "Oh, a money making venture made to look like a relative to not-for-profit organizations." Game theory informs me that financial considerations will still take precedent until it is profitable and it's the tech world, that may be never.
@RileyNorman @sc_griffith Maybe in a decade there will have been enough of them that we can clearly say <this doesn't work> or <this is what you need to do to succeed>.
@WomanCorn @sc_griffith
It's not a "plugin", it's a service. They can try to make it sound technicool all they want. It still requires that they provide processing and storage for its ongoing functioning, not just a bit of code
No corporation anywhere grants free processing and storage for another organizations services without a business reason. Is Bluesky going to buy loads of servers to manage other organization's resources?
The business answer is that no, they will not.