I feel like scientists should move towards open source solutions … I feel like most scientists are smart enough to launch a mastodon server, but well.
Never meet your heroes. If a scientist is human, they’re as fallible as any other. Just like some teachers aren’t there because they’re passionate. Some legitimately are bad if you ever had parent teacher conferences. Not passion nor intelligence saves you from making poor choices
Most scientists aren’t allowed to do stuff like that, or purely just don’t have the time.
There’s no excuse for using Xittter in 2025.
See you can be a really good scientist and not smart at the same time. Move to mastodon.
Non-EU folk - this website won’t open in EU because they don’t want to follow our local user privacy protections. What they’re going to do with your data? Who knows.
man that is so cheeky of them!
Instead of abiding with the law, they just chose to block content altogether 🥲
But yeah, you’re 100% right.
Why switch to BlueSky if you have Mastodon…
These who waited until the X take over to move away are simply following trends.
I think there’s a fairly serious problem for large accounts on mastodon but I will never have one so I can’t quite understand it myself.
Something like dealing with replies / scolds without spending all day blocking is too hard. It doesn’t help that “no algorithm” means “show first reply at the top” so quick replies can dominate comments.
The bit I don’t understand is why this is fine on blue sky. Is it just different users? I can’t quite believe that but I can’t see why blue sky would be less annoying.
Cause the name is hard to remember… I was trying to yesterday and the closest I could get is megatron and megalodon
I’m on both and Mastodon is missing (at least in any easy to use way) most of the features that make Bluesky such a good destination:
- instant add subscribe lists
- subscribable block lists
- custom feeds/subscribable algorithms
- keyword/topic blocks
- nuclear block where you never see the blocked person again
- optional discover feed
- DM preferences
All these things (and more I’m sure I’m forgetting), make Bluesky very quick to get started with and very powerful for honing your feeds to be exactly how you want and free of harassment and trolling.
I am still trying with Mastodon, but it’s really slow going and I can fully understand why people wouldn’t bother. After a year I am way behind where I was in a week with Bluesky.
It does have keyword blocking.
Not sure what nuclear block means but I can’t think of any way a blocked person could be seen again. It even has above nuclear blocking where you block their entire server.
It has custom feeds but the implementation with lists is very fiddly and I wish it would be improved.
There is a trending posts section but I think you want a personalised discover feed? Which will never happen of course.
Thanks for the update. Yes the recommended feed is personalized. It’s optional. The main feed has no algorithm, just who you follow.
Keyword blocking is a bit more sophisticated on Bluesky I think as they have a crowdsourced tagging system which allows you to opt in an out also of fagged words regardless of whether they appear in the body of the post.
Thanks for the list! As someone who has never used any Twitter-like site before (I guess microblog is the right term…?), and recently made a profile on Bluesky only to support it (I have used it briefly ~3 times since joining): what are the pros of Mastodon that Bluesky doesn’t have?
Main one is that it doesn’t manipulate your feed with stuff “you might enjoy” so you can’t be easily manipulated by the people setting the algorithm. Of course, this is exactly why people find it hard. People want to be fed stuff and told what to consume.
Bluesky also has the option of doing this, or not.
This one is so important. After a year my mastodon feed is perfectly tailored for me. When I open it I enjoy my time there and the posts I see. I can leave whenever I want, and without a feel of rage or anxiety. But the most important part is that I don’t feel the compulsive need to open it every other second. It’s to liberating in contrast with the algorithm led manipulation.
As far as I can tell, the advantages of Mastodon over Bluesky are:
- Well implemented federation
- No “starter kits” which are just positive-feedback loops for popular accounts
- No “algorithm” which promotes popularity or engagement over quality or relevance
Haha, thanks! I know it’s quite important for a good bunch of people here (on a federated site), but I guess I’ll stick with Bluesky then. Thanks for the insights! : )
I’ve seen a few larger creators say the reply management is bad at scale, too. The thing I mostly like is that here I am, reading Lemmy from Mastodon.
Yeah I’d prefer Mastodon to implement all these features and win, but I understand why it’s not winning ATM.
Same. Plus I came back here because Bluesky got too noisy so I’m kind of happy if it stays small!
Lemmy is still my favorite, I was never a huge fan of the Twitter model, but I enjoy taking part in the destruction of X.
over time I’ll probably end up moving over to Lemmy tbh. I think I’d prefer more of a forum vibe. I was never a Redditor so I didn’t “get” it until I started following Lemmy feeds.
Guess why? /s For real, people, some of you live in a bubble…
In a word, audience. I’d prefer it if everyone went with Mastodon, but the audience on BlueSky is orders of magnitude bigger. I cross post to both, but only because I don’t trust BlueSky not to do exactly what Twitter and Meta have done eventually.
They might do the Twitter. Jack Dorsey has already left the board saying exactly that.
Cool. I’m going out on a limb and saying Bluesky seems pretty based so far. I made an account when it was announced, and it’s pretty cool. Nice app, seemingly good mission statement.
I don’t want to dismiss something until it actually turns to shit. If it’s good now, I’ll use it now. When it turns to crap, I’ll just jump off. I’ll always have Lemmy and Mastodon as my mains, so I don’t see the harm personally. 🤷♂️ Let’s just hope it’ll last for the scientists’ sake.
Problem is it absolutely will turn when the Bluesky owners Jay Graber and Jack Dorsey decide it’s time to cash in. The project started out as a way to start decentralizing twitter, but they never actually accomplished that goal.
Why is it a problem? If a tool is good now, I’ll use it now.
I don’t stop myself from buying a new axe just because it’ll break eventually, you know what I mean?
Although obviously if there was an axe that never would break, I’d buy that! But maybe there are trade-offs. Maybe the never-breaking axe has a complicated handle or something. I don’t know, I’m trying my best with the axe analogy to describe Bluesky vs Mastodon. 😅 Hopefully it’s clear enough!
We can avoid it ever becoming shit when a wannabe dictator buys it if we make it impossible to sell: like mastodon and other federated options.
Jack Dorsey has nothing to do with Bluesky
Aside from being its founder. I know he left the board, but I haven’t seen any reason to believe he gave up ownership rights.
Leaving the board of directors is pretty much as giving up ownership rights. He has nothing to do with Bluesky anymore and he makes us sure he doesn’t want to.
Leaving the board of directors means no day to day control, but he could still exert influence on a shareholders vote.
It means he doesn’t directly manage it. Proof that he sold his ownership to somebody else would be evidence of giving up ownership rights.
How many times can people keep making the same mistake without us concluding they’re stupid? Closed corporate social networks ALWAYS go to shit. Enshitification is inevitable. And you’ll have the sunk cost fallacy stopping them from leaving, until they all finally get fed up and switch again. Own your network - stop swapping.
They gotta get their news out to the masses, at least they choose something besides twitter.
But we did leave and if (or when) it becomes enshitified, we will move again. We don’t need an idealised platform, we just want something easy to use which doesn’t (yet) have the baggage and culture of twiXer
But we did leave…
…about a decade too late.
Scientists should consult tech people about stuff like this just like we should consult scientists for science stuff. Unfortunately a lot of tech people also aren’t conscious of this stuff either.
Neat, I have an account on there already.
Why are they selecting BlueSky over the Fediverse?
Because the Fediverse is a mess with atrocious UX. Choose the wrong server and you might find you are cut off from a large chunk of it because a mastodon.art mod didn’t like something that happened on your instance and servers copy blocklist from each other (not a theoretical example, mind you, something I learned a few months into being on one particular instance.).
Servers can have all sorts of rules you will have to carefully study or risk getting banned (some for example will only allow images with descriptions being shared, this includes boosts.)
In short, the amount of work expected to participate is just - never - going to draw in the average user.
I would assume the same reason anyone chooses it over the fediverse, because they want their content to be easily discoverable.
Presumably either because they’ve not heard of the Fediverse, because almost nobody has, and/or because they want people to actually see what they post.
BlueSky is specifically designed as a drop-in Twitter replacement, it’s an easy transition, and tons of Twitter users have been advertising it for a long time. The Fediverse is comparatively obscure.
also mainstream professionals are going to bluesky, like press and corp PR. big step towards critical mass.
And it’s ridiculous because the difference between Mastodon and Twitter is minuscule.
I remember following some popular Twitter Head. Someone made a fake account on Mastodon and started getting followers but only posted once. Since then, his followers have grown to around 11k without any content at all! Imagine if it had been a real account. But the Twitter Head would rather switch to Bluesky instead. Such bullshit.
I don’t understand why people ask this. Most people you talk to on Lemmy will say they don’t want the userbase to grow much more than it has because with that growth comes the other problems that larger platforms like shitter and reddit have.
That’s true by and large and we also don’t have enough moderators here as is.
And for reasons I don’t understand, people keep asking why mainstream media outlets, influencers, and other trust accounts don’t transition to the fediverse, as if they won’t bring with them an influx of users (at least a fraction of which would be considered undesirable).
Why do you want them to come here? (As someone who would like to see Lemmy grow, I’m curious about how you think this will rollout and what the consequences will be). I would like to see Lemmy grow but I’m not sure all of that growth will have solely good follow-on effects.
The Fediverse experience starts with an unanswerable question: what server do you want to be on?
Most people will not have any way to answer that without knowing what the downstream impact will be. Mastodon people are working on smoothing that down, but it’s still a pretty fraught question. And if half a given community ends up on one server and half on another, they get fragmented and conversations and followers fizzle out.
Bluesky wants to tell people they’re not a single-node lock-in to avoid the Twitter effect, but it turns out that’s their key advantage.
The only thing that will guarantee they don’t end up like Twitter is if they revamp their corporate governance mechanisms, but they had to take VC money and haven’t come up with a long-term revenue model, so it’s not clear how they can avoid it.
For a long time now, the entry point to mastodon (joinmastodon.org) has had the default option as being “join mastodon.social”, with an option to choose a different server delegated to a secondary button. This compares to bsky, which shows you a dropdown of servers to choose from, defaulting to “bluesky social”.
It’s a tiny difference in UI; both have a default and offer an alternative. Why do people say it’s difficult on mastodon, while bluesky users are apparently not confused by the same option? Even if the option on bsky is basically a joke so far.
The email experience starts with an unanswerable question: what server do you want to be on?
No that decision is, for most people, made for them. You use the server provided for you by your ISP/work/university or the one that’s associated with logging into your smartphone.
For e-mail, it does not really make a difference.
Your email server doesn’t also run the group email list and all the join/drop/approve/ban operations. And if you bring your own email domain name, you can go somewhere else and get no disruption. But if you sign up for me@hotmail.com and hotmail bans you, you’ll lose all your connections and conversation history.
The canonical list of operations on a social media platform far exceed that of an email service, a bulletin board, or a messaging service group. It’s apples and rocket ships.
Bluesky is offering simple one-stop answers to a lot of these concerns. Fediverse needs to answer all these, plus address the whole long-term financial sustainability question.
“How can I send Gmails?”
Depends on whether you have an Android or iPhone for 99% of people. Or, they use an email account that their ISP provider created for them when they signed up.
just tell people to join mastodon.social. problem solved
This isn’t good, though. The whole point of the Fediverse is to be a decentralized network. If we push everyone to a single server, we’re centralizing the network!
This comes with added expenses for the maintainers, for one, and increases privacy and data-protection concerns as well.
Also, Mastodon actually already funnels people towards .social, though they don’t push it too hard. Check out joinmastodon.org and see for yourself.
IMO, the solution needs to be something like a server auto-selector, where the location of the user is taken into account, weighted by the number of active users on the server, and using some sort of vetting system to try to avoid sending people to unmaintained servers (like only selecting servers with a certain degree of uptime and uptime stability).
What happens when their server expenses aren’t covered, or bad people move in and every message has to be moderated, or the site moderators ban you?
And getting a whole community moved over… oof.
I moved a private mailing list to a WhatsApp group, then they changed their privacy policies. It took two years to convince people on to Signal, and 2/3 of the people didn’t make the jump. And this was with a small group of people who knew each other IRL. Imagi e doing that for tens or hundreds of thousands worldwide.
This is why people are hesitant to get off Meta/Twitter. They’re not going to do it again.
What happens when their server expenses aren’t covered, or bad people move in and every message has to be moderated, or the site moderators ban you?
What happens when BlueSky does this?
I moved a private mailing list to a WhatsApp group, then they changed their privacy policies.
Answering your own question there.
Just to be clear… I’m a massive Fediverse fan, and have concerns about BSKY’s governance. But many communities streaming off Twitter seem to be heading toward BSKY because it’s a shallower on-ramp.
Mastodon people recognize this and are working to smooth down the friction points.
The Fediverse experience starts with an unanswerable question: what server do you want to be on?
I’m so tired of this nonsense. The very simple answer is “literally any server”. It really doesn’t matter. At this point most apps have a default server.
Except it does matter. Your choice of server affects what content you’re allowed to see and what people you’re allowed to interact with.
Yes but no, not really. Most instances federate with all the same other instances.
Exactly! And even if a person gets it wrong, you’re encouraged to make an account elsewhere without fault or foul. That’s what I did. And what was I looking for when deciding on a server? “A general purpose server.” Oh, look World seems to be it, what a coincidence that it’s the top suggestion. lol…
The fediverse just doesn’t have the audience nor ease of use to be the smart investment for most people, at least in the short term.
In the long term, I believe the fediverse would be the right move. However most people struggle to think long-term outside of their own fields, and scientists are not immune to this phenomenon.
Its too nerdy for its own good. The plebs want simple. Its the way of things.
Probably because it has an algorithm
It doesn’t though.
This.
Many people like stuff getting recommending to them algorithmically.
tech and age, need for investment.
- fediverse is complicated for scientists not doing computer sciency stuff
- senior researchers are less flexible with new tech, so similarity w twitter means they don’t have to learn a new system
- Already present audience means there’s little risk in investing time in BS.
Isn’t BlueSky part of a fediverse?
A fediverse, but not the fediverse (ActivityPub/the one you’re on right now)
Why is ActivityPub “the” Fediverse? “Fediverse” is very broad and encompasses multiple protocols, a lot of which predate ActivityPub becoming commonplace.
The original Fediverse apps are still around and don’t use ActivityPub. For example, StatusNet / GNU Social use OStatus and Identica uses Activity Streams / ActivityPump (which was the protocol before ActivityPub). diaspora (if it’s still around) used its own protocol too.
Some of the older apps have adapted to use ActivityPub, while some of them still exist in their own separate part of the Fediverse.
nothing makes me more skeptical than seeing the word “scientists” in a headline.
At least they weren’t baffled
Surely there was at least some kind of breakthrough
perhaps a bafflethrough
Good. Sucks that it took open fascism to get that to happen, but at least it happened.
Agreed, at least it’s happening with Meta too.
from one monoplatform to another? OK cool, what could go wrong?
oof. blue sky was created by the guy who made twitter wasn’t it? if he sells to the next bond villain, blue sky will just become twitter 2.0.
open source, decentralized.
i have accepted that most of the internet will be a vicious cycle of enshittification. go to cool new site, site gets too popular for its own good, monetization kicks in, site now sucks, rinse and repeat.
FOSS stuff like lemmy and mastodon will never get past the first step, which is fine. they will just occupy a separate niche.
Look at Linux’s popularity over the
yearsdecades. I’ve used it since I was 10 years old twenty years ago. It is absolutely climbing. FOSS hasn’t even peaked yet lolFOSS stuff like lemmy and mastodon will never get past the first step, which is fine. they will just occupy a separate niche.
I wouldn’t say never, but fedverse projects will need to find ways to smooth off the rough edges. Also the more enshittifcation happens the more I think people will be willing and able to get past the rough edges. If any one of the services breaks through and becomes mainstream, it’ll provide a roadmap to success for other services and people will be more comfortable with the concepts.
Yes but it’s also a good sign that he left the project some time ago. He’s all about NOSTR now.
Proof that people rarely know much about anything outside of their field. They’ll just be playing this song and dance again when the Bluesky owner cashes in.
If/when that happens, its still better than giving twitter any traffic.
There is at least some (admittedly subpar) federation possible. So if the need is great enough, someone may take up the challenge.
All these people - they don’t learn.
For microblogs NOSTR is already better than everything else, right now. Provided you don’t care much about keeping the same identity over years, cause an identity is a pubkey there, used directly (no temporary identities signed by it or something), so with more popularity those will be lost again and again.
I don’t use microblogs, just it seems to have that functionality functioning perfectly and in distributed fashion.
If you don’t like cryptobros there (less and less dominant over time btw), then BlueSky might raise even bigger suspicions.
