A lot of people talking about #bluesky on fedi are just starting by assuming bad faith, and projecting their fears.
@WomanCorn
Which is unfortunately the most reasonable assumption.
@lispegistus people are spinning doom scenarios that don't seem very plausible to me, primarily on the strength of <I don't like that guy.>
Seems like bad reasoning.
@WomanCorn I've been offline for a couple of weeks, so I haven't seen the exaggerated claims or really much of the discourse, but I do know that the VC incentive structure will severely disadvantage users in favor of information management organizations(advertisers, special interest groups, state sponsored disinfo campaigns, etc.) as basically inevitable. If people stay away because Jack is literally Hitler in their heads, even if that's not true, it's still probably better for them :)
@lispegistus @WomanCorn Well, it's simultaneously true that some misinfo has circulated pretty widely on Mastodon and that there are valid grounds for concern with Bluesky's long-term viability, both for organizational and technical reasons, I think.
@andrea @WomanCorn Seems to me all the disinfo/spam/ddos campaigns are centered around either "sketchy instance that just popped up and gets defederated instantly" or "literally mastodon dot social". So far it seems this place is rather resilient even with the biggest instance asleep at the wheel.
@lispegistus @WomanCorn Oh, I meant misinfo about BlueSky specifically. It might be in better shape than a lot are imagining organizationally due to the public benefit LLC structure, but the reliance on what they're calling a "Big Graph Service" as a potential chokepoint could be a real hazard depending on resource demands.
@WomanCorn Something I'm realizing in recent years is that a claims ridiculousness is a very bad proxy for it's validity before more information is available :) But more importantly, bad faith being assumed, regardless of what claims that assumption generates, is not unreasonable given the people involved.