[HN Gopher] Bluesky CEO Jay Graber is stepping down
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Bluesky CEO Jay Graber is stepping down
        
       https://www.wired.com/story/bluesky-ceo-jay-graber-is-steppi...
       (https://web.archive.org/web/20260309191134/https://www.wired...)
       https://toni.org/2026/03/09/coming-off-the-bench-for-bluesky...
        
       Author : minimaxir
       Score  : 238 points
       Date   : 2026-03-09 19:09 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (bsky.social)
 (TXT) w3m dump (bsky.social)
        
       | ChrisArchitect wrote:
       | Post from new CEO Toni Schneider
       | https://toni.org/2026/03/09/coming-off-the-bench-for-bluesky...
        
         | 12_throw_away wrote:
         | There's only a single non-platitude in the entire letter, but
         | luckily it provides us with a wealth of information about
         | what's coming next:
         | 
         | > I've been a partner at True Ventures for many years
        
           | rvz wrote:
           | > PS: My role as interim CEO will be to help set up Bluesky's
           | next phase of growth.
           | 
           | This 'growth' comes with a lot of negative things and rarely
           | lots of good things.
        
             | verdverm wrote:
             | The brand already has a defined public perception that will
             | be hard to change, even for those who've only heard it by
             | name (eg Fox News). As a user, I generally agree with the
             | Blue MAGA sentiments, even though it is much more diverse
             | than that and you can filter out political content if you
             | want. This is likely Bluesky's biggest challenge in a
             | return to growth.
             | 
             | This is separate from ATProto, which I still maintain
             | positive sentiment for.
        
             | volkercraig wrote:
             | What is it that doctors call growth at any cost? Cancer?
        
       | multisport wrote:
       | Just to say the obvious: the new CEO is a VC partner and former
       | CEO of Automattic. That seems very bad, no matter how "committed"
       | they are to the vision of Bluesky.
        
         | plsft wrote:
         | thats not a good sign
        
         | jsheard wrote:
         | He's only meant to be filling in temporarily per the Wired
         | article, but we'll see.
        
           | multisport wrote:
           | Fair enough, I've never been involved in a CEO recruitment, I
           | can't imagine the candidate pool tends to include people like
           | the _previous_ CEO of Bluesky
        
             | marksomnian wrote:
             | It's not that unusual to have an interim CEO hold the reins
             | (read: sign anything that needs the CEO's signature) while
             | a permanent one is found.
        
               | alterom wrote:
               | That's not what the comment you're responding to is
               | about.
        
         | ribosometronome wrote:
         | Apologies, I'm probably under a rock, but why is that bad? I
         | see they're behind WordPress but am not sure what the 1:1 is.
         | The WP Engine stuff?
        
           | Legend2440 wrote:
           | There was some WP drama between Automattic and the WP
           | community a while back.
           | 
           | Also the whole point of Bluesky is that they aren't supposed
           | to be a big evil silicon valley tech company. But now you
           | have a silicon-valley VC running the thing.
        
             | captainbland wrote:
             | They'd already taken VC money hadn't they? It's got to be
             | said though that tech startups are getting very formulaic.
             | Monster of the week vibes.
        
             | orphea wrote:
             | Matt M. was behind the drama from WordPress' side though.
             | It looks like Toni Schneider left in 2014.
        
               | rmccue wrote:
               | Toni was in fact the adult supervision brought in by
               | Automattic's board when the company was young and Matt
               | was inexperienced.
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | And apparently adult supervision was needed.
        
               | qingcharles wrote:
               | And still needed...
        
             | bananamogul wrote:
             | "Some drama"...yeah, the way there was drama between
             | Germany and the Soviet Union back in 1941.
             | 
             | Automattic's Matt Mullenweg is downright insane. Just
             | google their war with WP Engine and by extension the entire
             | WordPress community.
        
         | paxys wrote:
         | Why is that bad?
        
         | mjr00 wrote:
         | Ultimately the goal "build a nice community where people can
         | enjoy social interactions" is fully incompatible with "build
         | the next Everything For Everyone Social Website like
         | twitter/facebook/instagram/youtube/tiktok/etc so that we can
         | get 5 billion users and start pushing ads at people".
         | Unfortunately once you take VC funding, you no longer have the
         | option of doing the former.
         | 
         | From an actual content perspective Bluesky is fine, but there's
         | no investor who would take a look at the site's user
         | statistics[0] and say "oh yeah things are going great." There
         | needs to be drastic changes if investors hope to have any
         | return on investment.
         | 
         | [0] https://bsky.jazco.dev/stats
        
           | pron wrote:
           | Another problem is that Twitter's demise left people who
           | liked the format disenchanted and suspicious (and rightly
           | so), and because of that, trying to recreate Twitter is bound
           | to fail, at least until some more time passes.
        
             | ghaff wrote:
             | For whatever faults the old Twitter had pre-Musk, it did
             | establish a certain critical mass for a certain type of
             | short form threaded discussion which seems to be largely
             | dead at this point.
        
               | alex1138 wrote:
               | Jack seemed interested in the protocol side of the house
               | and making a good product that was in spirit of the
               | internet, it also had a mix of people you might know IRL
               | (with reasonable privacy defaults) and official
               | sources/public figures. I don't think he was much
               | interested in the censorship, it feels they got run over
               | by a bunch of activist types during covid (who decided it
               | was de rigeur to censor real doctors for perceived
               | 'misinformation'). Jack started work on Bluesky and now
               | is involved in Nostr
               | 
               | Speaking personally, supposedly Twitter now (X) still has
               | a bunch of censorship and I don't especially like Musk
               | (but what he did was valuable, showing Jay Bhattacharya
               | he'd be put on a trending blacklist) and the site is...
               | well, I should be able to follow threads without having
               | an account but they crippled it so much. It reminds me of
               | Instagram, "log in to see any PUBLIC page"
        
             | ValentineC wrote:
             | Twitter's main problem wasn't the network, but fElon Musk
             | running amok.
        
               | pron wrote:
               | Of course, but the damage was done.
        
           | verdverm wrote:
           | That user number is not reproducible last time I tried (~8
           | months ago). I was looking at the code the other day and saw
           | what I believe is one of the reasons, but I still couldn't
           | find several million accounts (>10%), which is pretty hard to
           | lose. (8+ bsky run pds equivalents)
           | 
           | This also does not account for (1) people with multiple
           | accounts (labellers, feeds, bots, intent) or actual activity
           | (significant % are likely churned, didn't delete)
        
             | mjr00 wrote:
             | Even if the stats are off by a factor of 10 it wouldn't
             | matter. You could remove the numbers from the user axis
             | entirely and it would paint the same story: there were
             | massive user influxes after the 2024 US election and the
             | inauguration in January, but user retention has been on a
             | steep decline for the year+ since.
             | 
             | Again, this is not a reflection of anything bad about
             | Bluesky _as a user_. IMO a smaller and more focused is a
             | _good_ thing for the actual community, hence why I read
             | /post on HN and not Reddit or Twitter. However as an
             | _investor_ there 's basically no way to interpret those
             | statistics as anything but bad.
        
               | verdverm wrote:
               | Strong agreement, though I would say it looks to have
               | reached a stable level for now. I've found several
               | subcommunities that I can get good info from. I'm curious
               | how the '26 election cycle will affect things, already
               | seeing increase political discourse.
        
         | Bnjoroge wrote:
         | The vision of Bluesky isnt compatible with it existing in a
         | capitalistic society.
        
         | RIMR wrote:
         | To be honest, I was never entirely on board with Jay's almost
         | exclusively cryptocurrency background. I think she's done an
         | acceptable job as CEO, but I have also felt that leadership at
         | Bluesky was never good enough to see legitimate success.
         | 
         | Today, Bluesky remains largely undermoderated and they have
         | managed to bake in more toxic features Twitter ever did in such
         | a short timespan. Its success is largely driven by having a UI
         | closer to Twitter's original UI than any other alternative, and
         | taking a stronger stance against far-right rhetoric than
         | Twitter.
         | 
         | The only technical saving grace is the broad control you can
         | take over the algorithm to avoid the content you don't want to
         | see, but Bluesky is generally covered with more calls for
         | violence than their nascent content team could ever actually
         | deal with.
         | 
         | And I have yet to actually see a real use of ATproto that isn't
         | just immediately blown out of the water by ActivityPub.
         | 
         | But I digress, the new CEO pretty much hammers that final nail
         | in the coffin for me. I have zero belief in Bluesky to be
         | anything but another awful corporate corner of the web that I
         | should avoid.
        
           | reverius42 wrote:
           | > Its success is largely driven by having a UI closer to
           | Twitter's original UI than any other alternative, and taking
           | a stronger stance against far-right rhetoric than Twitter.
           | 
           | These things are very valuable, and if Bluesky can't succeed
           | doing them, I hope someone else can.
        
       | asymmetric wrote:
       | And so it begins.
        
         | jb1991 wrote:
         | Go on..
        
       | TyrunDemeg101 wrote:
       | Meet the new boss, same as the old boss...
        
       | amadeuspagel wrote:
       | > and proved that a values-driven social network could thrive at
       | scale.
       | 
       | How could a social network, or anything humans create, not be
       | values-driven?
        
         | _heimdall wrote:
         | Values aren't the only motivator, unless you take an extremely
         | broad definition of values.
        
           | plufz wrote:
           | Yeah, the value of money is ironically usually not what we
           | mean with "values".
        
         | mcdonje wrote:
         | Seriously? If a company is publicly traded, they're legally
         | required to prioritize shareholder value, unless they're a
         | benefit corp or something with multiple bottom lines. I suppose
         | you could call it values-driven to drive up the bottom line,
         | but that's not normally what people mean.
        
           | jakelazaroff wrote:
           | IANAL but no, executives are not actually legally required to
           | increase shareholder value.
        
             | verdverm wrote:
             | They generally are aiui. Bluesky was formed as a PBC, which
             | is basically a corporation where investors cannot sue for
             | deralict of fiduciary duty.
        
             | irishcoffee wrote:
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co.#Judgm
             | e...
             | 
             | Allow me introduce you to the inception of enshittification
        
               | jakelazaroff wrote:
               | The section you linked to says the decision was non-
               | binding, and the next section includes multiple quotes
               | disputing the idea that such a legal requirement exists.
        
         | Zigurd wrote:
         | I suppose in the same way that all eating is health and
         | nutrition driven. Good or bad.
        
         | paxys wrote:
         | The only value driving most things you see online is the value
         | of money. Which is not the kind of values they are referring
         | to.
        
         | relaxing wrote:
         | You know how there are two sexual orientations: straight, and
         | Political?
         | 
         | It's sort of like that.
        
         | rchaud wrote:
         | "values-driven" is the TedTalk-ified equivalent of MBA-speak
         | like "synergy". Meaningless and unmeasurable, but sounds good
         | in a pitch deck.
        
       | x0x0 wrote:
       | Sounds like a firing / soft firing / come to jesus moment about
       | the viability of the business...
        
         | alephnerd wrote:
         | Pretty much. It's fun seeing idealists get slapped by reality.
         | If you want to protect your ideals you better know how to fight
         | for them using the same tactics as your competitors.
         | 
         | Learning how to build a board that is in your favor, making
         | alliances with less than pure players if needed, and being
         | ruthlessly competitive allows an ideal to become reality.
        
           | spacechild1 wrote:
           | What's fun about it?
        
             | alephnerd wrote:
             | It's like seeing your kid learn how to walk. They'll fail a
             | couple of times, but they'll get toughen up and finally
             | learn.
        
           | pfraze wrote:
           | You are wrong about pretty much all of that, including your
           | assumed reasoning for why this is happening. Jay chose to
           | change her role so she could do deeper work on the
           | technology. That's it.
        
             | verdverm wrote:
             | The issue is that no one really believes the corporate
             | speak any more. Bluesky does not get a pass on this, re: VC
             | funding
             | 
             | I have concerns about one piece of messaging I've seen
             | lately, working on a writeup, stay tuned
        
         | verdverm wrote:
         | They could have launched paid subscriptions, they even said
         | they were looking into it, crickets...
        
       | DiabloD3 wrote:
       | Huh, I guess betting on Mastodon winning was the right bet.
        
         | embedding-shape wrote:
         | Mastodon already won, by being used by people. Bluesky also
         | won, by also being used by people. Not sure if this is a
         | "winner takes it all" scenario? As long as you can host it
         | yourself, I don't really mind where people are, both seem to
         | work and have "won" for what they set out to do.
        
           | verdverm wrote:
           | Since developing on ATProto, one thing I have hoped for is
           | less of this "winner take all" world. I think the protocol
           | can be for much more than social media, could do dropbox if
           | permissions and private data are designed well. This comment
           | by the main protocol dev working on this does not inspire
           | confidence on my part.
           | 
           | https://bsky.app/profile/dholms.at/post/3mfsehg6ius2a
        
           | lich_king wrote:
           | It is a zero-sum game in some sense, because you go where
           | your friends or "influencers" are.
           | 
           | Mastodon ended up losing its user base to Bluesky during the
           | early Twitter exodus because many influencers and journalists
           | wanted to have an "elite" status and a special relationship
           | with the platform, so they preferred a platform owned by
           | Dorsey to some hippie open-source thing. Bluesky, in turn,
           | ended up losing back to Twitter/X when it turned out to be a
           | place where you mostly talk about how awful Twitter/X is.
           | 
           | I want to say that we don't need social networks where we
           | constantly interact with hundreds of thousands of strangers,
           | but I'm writing this on HN, so...
        
             | dv35z wrote:
             | Just an anecdote - I never used Twitter/X, and never used
             | BlueSky. Recently (about a year ago), joined Mastodon. I
             | enjoy it, find a lot of value there, and have interesting
             | conversations (recently about Mint Debian Linux & sound-
             | systems, and also maker-space CNC design tools). There
             | seems to be active investment in good features & quality on
             | the platform, including making it easier to host your own
             | organization server.
             | 
             | I believe, due to the format of engagement, its easy to
             | spend a lot of time there scrolling - so consider
             | 
             | (1) only using the platform on your desktop computer,
             | instead of phone,
             | 
             | (2) limiting time - 25 minutes a day is enough!
             | 
             | (3) Mute spammers, complainers, people with negative
             | attiudes - you can't catch them all, but you can
             | intentionally shape your experience over time.
             | 
             | (4) Subscribe to tags of your passions (example: #piano,
             | #makerspace, #drawing, #cats, #jujitsu, #cncrouter,
             | #3dprinting), and try to lean into that instead of getting
             | caught up in endless political reactions - which never
             | ends. You can be intentional, and subscribe to people who
             | have a positive vision for the version of the future you
             | prefer.
        
             | PaulHoule wrote:
             | Sometimes I think more the toxic people who wrote about
             | politics and identity on Mastodon moved on to Bluesky when
             | Trump got elected.
             | 
             | I don't see why it is "zero" sum, nothing stops you from
             | posting to more than one social. I mean, I have relatives
             | on Facebook and no prospect for getting them to change so I
             | cut-n-paste what I posted on Mastodon to Facebook, Bluesky,
             | LinkedIn, Tumblr, and all sorts of places.
        
             | carefree-bob wrote:
             | Curious, how many people do you need on a social network
             | before you can find someone to talk to or before it is
             | engaging enough for you?
             | 
             | I certainly don't need a billion users. I think I'd be
             | happy with 100,000 users -- what is your number?
             | 
             | I think this is related to the question of how big of a
             | city do you need to live in before you can find something
             | to do and are not bored living there. I'm fine with a city
             | of, say, 50,000-100,000. That is more than sufficient for
             | me to find an appropriate number of likeminded friends and
             | neighbors as well as interesting pursuits.
        
               | lich_king wrote:
               | > Curious, how many people do you need on a social
               | network before you can find someone to talk to or before
               | it is engaging enough for you?
               | 
               | I don't think that's a meaningful parameter to think
               | about? I'd say that on any social network, I have
               | meaningful, ongoing relationship with maybe 20 people. I
               | suspect that's the norm. But that doesn't mean you can
               | join a social network with 20 users and get that. I mean,
               | if it's a mailing list for friends and family, sure. But
               | not if it's 20 randomly-selected strangers from around
               | the world.
               | 
               | So the critical mass to make the "random stranger" type
               | of a social network work is much, much higher than the
               | number of daily interactions you need to keep coming
               | back.
        
               | carefree-bob wrote:
               | Yes, all you use is 20, but as the number increases the
               | odds of you finding your 20 goes up. I'm saying in
               | 100,000 roughly randomly selected people, I have
               | basically a 100% chance of finding my 20. 50,000 is
               | probably enough.
               | 
               | By the way, if your number is not the same as mine, I am
               | not intimating that this makes you deficient in some way.
               | Everyone has their own number.
        
             | BeetleB wrote:
             | > It is a zero-sum game in some sense, because you go where
             | your friends or "influencers" are.
             | 
             | Bluesky and Mastodon users can interact with each other
             | (provided both parties opt in). I'm on Mastodon, but I see
             | my friend's messages (he's on BlueSky) and vice versa. My
             | replies show on up on BlueSky and vice versa.
        
             | ascorbic wrote:
             | Bluesky won over Mastodon because the fedi model is
             | fundamentally flawed in its UX. For a flood of people
             | wamting "Twitter without Nazis", Bluesky was a good match.
             | I don't think Dorsey had anything to do with it, because
             | the influx happened after he'd already severed all ties.
        
               | ajsalminen wrote:
               | Some people are getting introduced to similar and in some
               | ways worse UX on Bluesky now that there are some actual
               | efforts to make it slightly less centralized.
        
           | dbbk wrote:
           | "Mastodon already won, by being used by people" I'm sorry
           | what
        
         | rvz wrote:
         | What did Mastodon win exactly?
         | 
         | Threads being the biggest Mastodon instance and federating with
         | mastodon.social (Meta signed contracts with instance
         | maintainers to do so) and the other 3 largest instances (Pawoo,
         | baragg (d_o_t) net, and mstdn (d-o-t) jp) taking up more that
         | >70% of the total users using it?
         | 
         | That doesn't sound good.
         | 
         | The CEO sold all of us out and was the only one that made real
         | money on Mastodon.
        
           | jeromegv wrote:
           | In what world did the Mastodon CEO made money out of Mastodon
           | beside the small public salary he's been taking? You are
           | making things up.
        
           | BeetleB wrote:
           | I won't doubt your statistics. In _practice_ , my experience
           | is that it really is distributed.
           | 
           | I just went to my feed (only people I follow), and although
           | mastodon.social showed up a few times, the majority of users
           | I interact with are on distinct servers. So out of 20 people,
           | I see 17 different servers.
           | 
           | My feed will not be impacted much if mastodon.social dies.
        
       | Ekaros wrote:
       | Wait Bluesky had a CEO? I thought it was some type of organic
       | open source collective.
        
         | AuthAuth wrote:
         | They constantly say they are a Public benefit corporation but
         | there is no actual difference between that an a corporation.
         | This leads to people assuming some kind of benevolence.
        
           | asmor wrote:
           | If you need a reference measure of "Public Benefit
           | Corporation", Anthropic is one too.
        
           | dbbk wrote:
           | There is an actual difference
        
             | AuthAuth wrote:
             | No there isnt.
        
         | SideburnsOfDoom wrote:
         | You're thinking of mastodon, and even that had a lead:
         | https://www.theregister.com/2025/11/19/mastodon_ceo_steps_do...
        
           | snapetom wrote:
           | I'm not going to speak for OP, but I definitely remember it
           | also being a rallying cry for Bluesky too. "No one person can
           | control the network blah blah blah"
        
             | SideburnsOfDoom wrote:
             | Bluesky's claims of being decentralised were always way way
             | ahead of the de-facto reality of it. That's not the same as
             | Mastodon.
             | 
             | It has been a "rallying cry" but it doesn't stand up to
             | much scrutiny of how Bluesky actually functions: an "open
             | protocol" with one central server means little. Maybe this
             | will change at some point in the future, and maybe it is
             | changing, see https://blacksky.community/ . But this is not
             | the same as Mastodon, where it's been that way for a while.
        
             | simonw wrote:
             | That's not at all incompatible with Bluesky having a funded
             | company with a CEO.
             | 
             | The term they use for this is "credible exit" - designing
             | the entire protocol such that if the company itself
             | misbehaves the affected users can leave to a separate
             | instance without losing their relationships or data.
        
         | MarsIronPI wrote:
         | Nah, that's Nostr. fiatjaf created it but doesn't hold any
         | actual authority. All the extensions are community-driven.
        
       | Kye wrote:
       | I have no idea what to think of this. Especially the Automattic
       | connection, the company with the petty tyrant running it. I would
       | want anyone coming from there to have learned something from the
       | failure of the WordPress Foundation since Bluesky will need some
       | foundationing too.
        
       | davidw wrote:
       | I was enjoying having one social network not run by horrid
       | people. Maybe it's time to go back to IRC or something.
        
         | ynniv wrote:
         | nostr
        
           | verdverm wrote:
           | no sir, never gonna do crypto social media
        
             | AirMax98 wrote:
             | Fun fact: under the hood atproto bears many similarities to
             | blockchain... it was funded in during the 2019/2020 crypto
             | craze. I'm not too involved, but outside of a consensus
             | mechanism, atproto looks a bit like a chain, kinda like
             | IPFS.
        
               | verdverm wrote:
               | I'm very deep into ATProto development, in particular I
               | have the first Permissioned PDS implementation [1]. It
               | definitely has roots in blockchain / federated, but makes
               | tradeoffs for UX.
               | 
               | The more interesting perspective is a Plug-n-Play
               | Distributed System [2]
               | 
               | [1] https://github.com/bluesky-
               | social/atproto/compare/main...ver...
               | 
               | [2] https://atproto.com/articles/atproto-for-distsys-
               | engineers
        
         | pfraze wrote:
         | I guess I'm honored that you feel like we weren't horrid. I
         | have gotten a very positive impression from Toni so far, fwiw.
        
           | davidw wrote:
           | I mean, the competition isn't setting a high bar, between the
           | guy complaining about 'white people not having a homeland'
           | and the other guy peddling addictive stuff to teens and AI
           | slop to their grandparents.
           | 
           | That said, I have genuinely been enjoying Blue Sky. It has
           | 'enough' for me. There are a bunch of YIMBYs and urbanists.
           | The mayor of my city and one of my city councilors are there.
           | There is starting to be a bike racing community. There are
           | some good local journalists.
           | 
           | I read your other comment; I hope your optimism is warranted.
        
             | pfraze wrote:
             | Same
        
       | rvz wrote:
       | Translation: VCs and the board pushed Jay out.
       | 
       | The interim CEO doesn't even use Bluesky himself, so at this
       | point you might as well move to Threads.
        
         | qcoret wrote:
         | This is false, he has been on Bluesky since 2024.
         | https://bsky.app/profile/toni.bsky.team
        
           | Lammy wrote:
           | Last activity 17 days ago, 23 days ago, 3 months ago, 3
           | months ago, 4 months ago
        
             | verdverm wrote:
             | Dive deeper with PDSLS
             | 
             | https://pdsls.dev/at://did:plc:cwf4mmm7mpzistinx3ox2zhj#col
             | l...
        
           | rvz wrote:
           | "17 posts" since 2024.
           | 
           | 13 of them are reposts, and 2 of them are his own _actual_
           | posts and then made 2 more posts about becoming the interim
           | CEO of Bluesky and then  "thanking" Jay.
           | 
           | That doesn't seem like he even uses it regularly only up
           | until the leadership changes.
        
         | baggachipz wrote:
         | Threads? The twitter clone owned by Meta? Yeah no thanks.
        
           | PaulHoule wrote:
           | ... most social networks give you a "notification" if
           | somebody follows you or engages with a post but there are two
           | exceptions: (1) is LinkedIn which gives you a double-dose of
           | main feed items you didn't click on and that you never
           | clicked on anything like ever so it's a chance to prove their
           | model is right... most social networks play a "ding" sound if
           | somebody likes your post but LinkedIn dings when you post
           | something because their standards are low. (2) Threads posts
           | "notifications" that are somewhere between completely
           | senseless and "political outrage of some kind but I can't
           | tell if they like Trump or hate Trump"
        
         | nout wrote:
         | Or if you want something actually better at the core, you can
         | switch to nostr. It's quite easy to even implement your own
         | client app for nostr (even more so with LLMs), so you can get
         | the experience you want.
        
       | jrm4 wrote:
       | Doomed from the start. It took me a while to figure this out, but
       | ATProto is generally a bad idea; maybe even _worse_ than Twitter.
       | 
       | Which is to say, it provides a _more robust model_ for your
       | (true) information and data to be exploited by others than even
       | the Twitter model.
       | 
       | The Mastodon-slash-email model that relies on individual servers
       | is better because decentralization is safer -- Those models bear
       | more genuine "ability to delete" and more "plausible
       | deniability."
        
         | fritzo wrote:
         | The community has voted for convenience over privacy, and
         | twitter and bluesky have won over mastodon. You're right, but
         | people don't actually care about privacy
        
           | ghaff wrote:
           | As someone who was once an avid twitter user, my sense is
           | that Mastodon--after a somewhat hopeful start just never
           | gained the network momentum. Bluesky came closest to
           | Twitter's old reach but is still something of a shadow of the
           | old Twitter (as Twitter/X is these days as well).
        
             | lich_king wrote:
             | Bluesky is not just a shadow, it's on a pretty steady
             | decline. Their DAU numbers are dropping every month. Which
             | probably tells you something about the unspoken reason for
             | this change.
        
               | ghaff wrote:
               | Without researching actual numbers, it feels like that
               | whole category of social media is pretty much
               | uninteresting at this point. Not sure what really
               | replaces it given that Facebook seems increasingly
               | infested with AI slop and sponsored posts.
        
               | verdverm wrote:
               | More IRL time with other people hopefully.
        
               | rekmarks wrote:
               | No they're not? https://bsky.jazco.dev/stats
        
               | lich_king wrote:
               | Yes they are? E.g.,
               | https://api.backlinko.com/app/uploads/2025/11/bluesky-
               | websit...
               | 
               | This is also visible in your stats if you extend the time
               | window. They had a peak in 2024 and are pretty much
               | declining month to month ever since.
        
               | haunter wrote:
               | Are we seeing the same? All the stats are steadily going
               | down https://i.imgur.com/QJakG56.png
        
               | PaulHoule wrote:
               | I'd describe that last six months as 'sideways' --- what
               | was that surge near the end of last year?
        
               | verdverm wrote:
               | My understanding was the end of year time off / holidays,
               | as compared to the dip around thanksgiving.
        
               | ajsalminen wrote:
               | I believe that surge was Elon announcing AI image editing
               | on X and a bunch of Japanese artists and their followers
               | trying out Bluesky.
        
               | verdverm wrote:
               | Jaz's stats are sus, use this instead:
               | https://bskycharts.edavis.dev/edavis.dev/index.html
        
             | rakovsky89 wrote:
             | Twitter/X is thriving, what are you talking about
        
           | lukev wrote:
           | Bluesky is very intentionally about public posting. It's a
           | bit weird to say people "don't care about privacy" when
           | speaking of a platform designed to amplify and distribute
           | posts as widely and effectively as possible.
        
             | PaulHoule wrote:
             | There is a lot of weirdness around Mastodon, particularly
             | some people can't seem to make up their minds if they want
             | the stuff they post to be visible or not.
        
               | jrm4 wrote:
               | Exactly. And I'm willing to be that Bluesky folk might be
               | somewhat similar because they haven't figured it out yet.
               | 
               | Except that the design of Bluesky severely increases the
               | possibility of your data getting out of your control. And
               | I can hear the immediate responses of "oh if you didn't
               | want it public, don't post it," but as should be
               | frightfully obvious -- not everyone thinks like that.
        
           | archagon wrote:
           | If a social network stays comparatively small but still
           | active, I see that as a huge win. Half the people I follow
           | are happily on Mastodon. I don't see that changing anytime
           | soon.
        
             | PaulHoule wrote:
             | I am on a bunch of socials but as time goes by I like my
             | cohort on Mastodon better and better.
        
             | verdverm wrote:
             | Many a Discord server would agree
        
           | alterom wrote:
           | >You're right, but people don't actually care about privacy
           | 
           | The entire point of a platform like Twitter / Bluesky is
           | _reach_ , not _privacy_.
           | 
           | Posts and discussions there are _meant to be_ public, and
           | highly visible.
           | 
           | It's not that people don't care. It's that this is not what
           | the platform is _for_.
           | 
           | What's important for a platform like that is not even
           | _anonymity_ , but functional _pseudonymity_.
           | 
           | And that thing is on its way to the effectively outlawed with
           | the push for "age verification".
           | 
           | People do notice it and leave [1], but at some point, there
           | might be no place to go to.
           | 
           | [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/1rmlzhy/welp_go
           | odb...
        
             | jrm4 wrote:
             | I 100% agree, I always thought that even Private Messages
             | were a bad idea.
             | 
             | But no, we're way past "if you don't want it public don't
             | post it." and then wiping our hands and being done. We need
             | to think in a policy kind of way on this.
             | 
             | And again, things are already dangerous -- but ATProto
             | makes them _more dangerous._ It 's something like a chain-
             | of-custody thing. I think the world is collectively safer
             | where the gathering of data like this is _less_ reliable
             | and _less_ verifiable.
             | 
             | ATProto's model makes the building of the proverbial evil
             | Big Brother panopticon thing a LOT easier.
        
           | ajsalminen wrote:
           | I'd rather say Twitter and Threads are the current winners if
           | we're talking about userbase. Bluesky is basically in the
           | same league with Mastodon while those two are so far above
           | that you can't even see them without a telescope.
        
           | jrm4 wrote:
           | I mostly don't like this take because it presumes a precise
           | definition of privacy that we all agree on. And it's not even
           | remotely close to that, which is why I think the Bluesky
           | model is perhaps insidious.
        
             | fritzo wrote:
             | Good point. For sake of argument, how about this
             | stratification of privacy levels:
             | 
             | twitter/x/bluesky - a big tech company owns your data
             | 
             | mastodon - a grassroots community organization owns your
             | data
             | 
             | zulip - someone you've met personally owns the data
             | 
             | your blog - you own the data
             | 
             | (and yes these are a bit of a category error, but to
             | achieve privacy maybe we should broaden the category and
             | sacrifice reach)
        
         | lukev wrote:
         | You can care a lot about plausible deniability and the ability
         | to delete your own data, but it seems a bit weird to denounce a
         | whole ecosystem as "generally a bad idea" on those grounds,
         | when that is a deliberate anti-goal of the system design.
         | 
         | Don't use it if you don't like it. Some of us like the strong
         | identity and content verification.
        
           | jrm4 wrote:
           | "Don't use it if you don't like it" is not a sufficient
           | response here, because the gathering and verifying of
           | personal data is NOT PURELY AN INDIVIDUAL PROBLEM. You might
           | post about me. Etc.
           | 
           | Proverbial Big Brother ALSO likes "strong identity and
           | content verification."
        
         | Zak wrote:
         | The Mastodon model does not offer much ability to delete. Well-
         | behaved servers will honor delete requests, but the protocol
         | doesn't mandate it. Additionally, a user cannot generate delete
         | requests if they get banned from their server or the server
         | shuts down. Users and server admins can't control whether
         | another server permits archiving of their content. Mastodon and
         | other fediverse software allows following public posts by RSS,
         | and RSS clients might keep them forever.
         | 
         | The only reasonable understanding is that these protocols are
         | for for publishing to the public. It is not possible to
         | reliably retract anything published to thousands of other
         | peoples' computers. We used to try to teach people that _the
         | internet is forever_ , and that's even more true with federated
         | protocols. That doesn't make them a bad idea.
        
           | NoahZuniga wrote:
           | But at proto is equally open? You can also just save all of
           | at proto.
        
             | Zak wrote:
             | You can save all of anything someone makes public with
             | ATProto, ActivityPub, or RSS. You can do that with anything
             | someone puts on a web page too, but those protocols
             | simplify automation.
             | 
             | I understand why people want to be able to delete things
             | from the internet, but it doesn't work that way. It has
             | never worked that way. It can't work that way unless every
             | computer is locked down to running remotely attested
             | government-approved software, and that's obviously worse.
        
               | ghaff wrote:
               | Once you hit publish, it's public and anyone and everyone
               | can save a copy and distribute it. If you don't like
               | that, don't hit publish.
        
               | verdverm wrote:
               | ATProto won't be this way for much longer. Permissioned
               | data is coming and will not be broadcast or accessible
               | without grants. This will sit next to the public data,
               | but separate.
        
           | jrm4 wrote:
           | Actually, yes, it does.
           | 
           | Or more precisely, it might. We now have a better idea of how
           | people actually behave and it's not in accordance with "the
           | internet is forever," and I have no interest in blaming them
           | for 'human nature' in that way.
           | 
           | And it's all still dangerous. Again, I know the internet is
           | forever, but someone else posting about ME might not.
           | 
           | This isn't an _individual_ thing. It 's "ecological."
           | 
           | And I have no interest in making Big Brother THAT MUCH EASIER
           | to build.
        
           | RIMR wrote:
           | I think it's important to remember that decentralization is a
           | barrier to having control over your data. If you're going to
           | participate in these systems, you should treat everything you
           | do as permanent, because by design you will not be in control
           | of where that data is stored.
        
         | AlienRobot wrote:
         | What? You don't even need to understand how Mastodon works in
         | depth to realize that sending a post to 500 different servers
         | owned by completely different people in completely different
         | jurisdictions is going to make it harder to delete later.
        
       | muppetman wrote:
       | Ahhh yup, wondered how long it'd take before this happened. Sorry
       | to sound like THAT guy, but I'm glad I deleted my account ages
       | ago. I liked BS and it seemed good but yea, here comes Twitter
       | 3.0
        
       | pfraze wrote:
       | This move came from Jay so that she could focus more on the
       | atproto ecosystem and forward looking development. Personally,
       | I'm happy for her. The CEO role gets extremely wrapped up in
       | operations & org building, and as a technologist I'm not sure it
       | would be for me.
       | 
       | I've met with Toni a couple of times and he seems really
       | excellent. He was CEO of Automattic (Wordpress) from 2006 to
       | 2014, and that means a fair amount of expertise making an open-
       | source-first company work. He cares about an open internet and
       | protocol, and seems very keen to drive the mission forward.
       | 
       | For a little extra assurance, atproto is hopefully quite close to
       | establishing an IETF working group, and the DID PLC Directory is
       | likewise close to establishing the independent entity. Our
       | priorities for an open network are unchanged.
        
         | CactusBlue wrote:
         | We don't need "open" networks (Digital Panopticons), we need
         | private networks.
        
           | pfraze wrote:
           | Both are good
        
           | baliex wrote:
           | What are your thoughts on people self hosting their own
           | websites and blogs instead of posting to big tech platforms?
           | I'd say that extra openness was a good thing. I absolutely
           | believe in privacy as well, and think ownership is important
           | too.
        
             | CactusBlue wrote:
             | We already could've done that before, just throw a HTML
             | file on a HTTP server on a cheap VPS
        
               | danabramov wrote:
               | That's pretty much what atproto is, except it's typed
               | JSON rather than HTML, and HTTP+WebSockets to allow
               | aggregation.
               | 
               | I wrote more about how it works here if you're curious:
               | https://overreacted.io/a-social-filesystem/
        
               | CactusBlue wrote:
               | and I actually don't hate that bit (I really like
               | lexicons, although I might have approached it in a
               | different way) - what I hate is the aggregation layer. I
               | know that it is possible to have an AppView-less atproto
               | app (e.g. RedDwarf), but I feel like much of the
               | ecosystem still defaults to the assumption that it will
               | go through the Bluesky AppView.
        
               | danabramov wrote:
               | Unrelated apps (https://leaflet.pub/,
               | https://tangled.org/, http://semble.so/) don't go through
               | Bluesky Appview (since they need aggregations of
               | different kind of data). I think aggregation is the only
               | model that can compete with centralized services on UX,
               | but of course different apps would need different
               | backends.
        
               | verdverm wrote:
               | You may be confusing the Relay, a protocol component run
               | by Bluesky, with the Bluesky AppView
               | 
               | https://atproto.com/articles/atproto-for-distsys-
               | engineers
        
               | jeffbee wrote:
               | This is like saying anyone can open a lemonade stand in
               | Mogadishu.
        
           | Hamuko wrote:
           | Who is this "we" and where can I read their opinions?
        
           | jauntywundrkind wrote:
           | We have never had an online open public space where each of
           | us has our voice, can shape our experience, can use our own
           | compsable moderation, can integrate with whatever apps we
           | choose.
           | 
           | How, in spite of having no data on what it would be like,
           | people are so confident that leaving shared open connected
           | mediums behind is the only way to go is such a mystery to me.
           | 
           | The radio station I'm on just played a modem tone, Mountain
           | Chill Radio. But I was already gearing up to write what an
           | amazing era this has been, how incredible a rise it has been
           | that we can connect & talk, with so many people. My dialtone
           | travels so much further & that is glorious. I have no idea,
           | feel like I would have no chance to build a good private
           | network for myself, that my life would stagnante and closed,
           | if I had to build my networks myself in private, smuggling
           | the light of my soul to others rather than being able to let
           | it out.
           | 
           | I am happy to be online. I am proud of my "data", my voice,
           | my app records. There's some less pleasant less shiny
           | corners! But it is mad incredible that I get to do this live,
           | that I get to have so many edges of connection and
           | serendipity. People provide the most wild interesting
           | comments and suggestions and topics, ongoingly. I benefit so
           | much from them sharing their lives.
           | 
           | I spiritually believe deeply that we have our light to share
           | with the universe. To turn your nose up at sharing, to
           | renounce & see only evil, to let the Fear Uncertainty and
           | Doubt, this spectre of the closed/bad/no-good controlling
           | systems shape our thinking here is a pandora's box: I say you
           | are shutting the door right as hope is finally trying to get
           | out.
        
         | hinkley wrote:
         | There is a very common inflection point in companies where the
         | CEO needs to be about maintaining what is built instead of
         | growing forever. You cannot, for instance, when you have 60%
         | market share expect the company to keep growing linearly. The
         | people who do end up stooping to questionable means to grow new
         | markets they have no business growing, like for instance
         | children.
         | 
         | Some orgs will go through three, from founder, to growth, to
         | sustaining.
        
         | arbglhcs0 wrote:
         | hiring pfraze was the biggest mistake the company ever made
        
       | AJRF wrote:
       | I've found lately that between age gating and twitter being -
       | well I don't want to get into it - I am no longer looking for
       | replacements - I just want to stop using those parts of the
       | internet.
       | 
       | Now I am down to file sharing, email and functions related to my
       | job, a little youtube - but trying to ween myself of that. The
       | internet as I knew it is dead.
        
       | haunter wrote:
       | If you follow live sports then Twitter is still unparalleled
       | because people (and broadcasters too) upload highlights in near
       | real time. Every event, goal, home run, crash etc.
        
         | Aboutplants wrote:
         | This is massively true and was the last thing that I had to
         | overcome when dropping Twitter. Certain sports have better
         | engagement than others but it is pretty staggering the
         | difference. If BlueSky could figure that out then they would
         | have a legitimate shot at substantial success
        
           | haunter wrote:
           | >If BlueSky could figure that out
           | 
           | It's a "people problem" not a technical one. For example if
           | you are following anything from Asia, or just generally from
           | Japan and Korea you will most likely see it on Twitter, there
           | was never a big exodus of users there. Bsky has almost 0
           | engagement. Just watching WBC this week and I wanted to see
           | korean highlights of their games. They are all over on
           | Twitter, nothing on Bsky.
        
         | ChicagoDave wrote:
         | They are aware:
         | 
         | https://jobs.gem.com/bluesky/am9icG9zdDqRK9D8osOaeyyESJ7cPsX...
         | 
         | Job opening to build sports relationships.
        
         | qingcharles wrote:
         | There's an absolute ton of niches which are completely anchored
         | to Twitter. It's hard to get a whole raft of people to move at
         | once :(
        
         | rorylawless wrote:
         | For high-level football/calcio/soccer at least, Reddit is and
         | has been better for a long time. Often goal and other key
         | highlights are uploaded before the broadcasters.
        
         | nomilk wrote:
         | Are there tools that let users post to both simultaneously?
         | (e.g. similar to how streamers can simultaneously stream to
         | Twitch/YT/X easily)
        
       | monster_truck wrote:
       | bsky is going to get "freenode boyking'd" so hard. It, the maybe
       | 300k human users, and 42.7 million bots are going to be sold and
       | they will pull up the drawbridges.
        
       | AbstractH24 wrote:
       | Blue sky seems like a bit of a flop
       | 
       | Let's not forget Jack Dorsey laid off half of Cash the other week
        
         | fredgrott wrote:
         | by what metric....
         | 
         | for example name the only Twitter investment that made
         | money....
         | 
         | hint...Bluesky.....all other Twitter projects failed.
        
       | taurath wrote:
       | Cue 3 months to the "I'm having to make some hard decisions"
       | email. Whats the board at Bluesky like?
        
       | arcalinea wrote:
       | Jay here: this is a transition I've been working towards for
       | awhile, and I'm looking forward to advancing the vision and
       | ecosystem as CIO (Chief Innovation Officer). Toni has been an
       | advisor to us for years, and I personally recruited him to take
       | over as CEO while I focus on new projects within the company.
       | It's an honor to have him on board to lead us into this next
       | stage of growth.
        
         | CactusBlue wrote:
         | How do you feel about the recent communication failures from
         | the team to the userbase? As another builder of an open-source
         | social platform, we must all understand that it is paramount
         | for _any_ company to not antagonize its customers, doubly so
         | for a SOCIAL platform. I do understand that Bluesky and ATProto
         | has to deal with a lot of baggage from both the old userbase
         | and the new influx from the X /Twitter exodus, but engaging in
         | user-antagonistic communication caused me to sour on the whole
         | protocol.
        
           | catapart wrote:
           | Big time +1, here. Would love to hear something - anything -
           | from the bsky team that takes some accountability.
        
           | parl_match wrote:
           | > user-antagonistic communication
           | 
           | could you provide some examples? i didn't really see this,
           | but maybe i just missed it
        
             | CactusBlue wrote:
             | https://techcrunch.com/2025/10/05/waffles-eat-bluesky/
        
               | parl_match wrote:
               | I don't like Jesse Singal's work or his political
               | positions (he fucking sucks!), but this is hardly
               | antagonistic except to maybe a small group of terminally
               | online posters who take posting too seriously.
               | 
               | Although, I guess that is the audience bluesky was
               | targeting when they first started. So I guess I
               | understand the criticism.
               | 
               | Also, it is a very ironic demonstration of the
               | pancakes/waffles meme. Interjecting into an unrelated
               | topic to ask the mods to ban someone you don't like is a
               | tradition as old as dial up BBS. So I'm glad to see the
               | torch is being carried forward to a younger generation.
        
               | CactusBlue wrote:
               | I don't even think having Jesse Singal on the platform is
               | the problem (like it or not, I believe that all beings
               | must have the right to communicate); the problem here was
               | the communication failure when communicating this
               | decision to the userbase. They could have just reiterated
               | their rules and left it at that; instead, they chose to
               | mock their userbase, write them off as harassment, and
               | banned users left and right, abusing their position in
               | network to censor people at every layer of the protocol.
        
               | parl_match wrote:
               | > instead, they chose to mock their userbase
               | 
               | Doing the pancakes/waffles thing in the thread about
               | pancakes/waffles is so fucking on the nose and
               | demonstrates a complete lack of self awareness.
               | 
               | > They could have just reiterated their rules and left it
               | at that; instead, they chose to mock their userbase,
               | write them off as harassment, and banned users left and
               | right, abusing their position in network to censor people
               | at every layer of the protocol.
               | 
               | The more I dig into it, the more your one-sided whinging
               | falls apart. I agree they could have handled it somewhat
               | better, but I have very little sympathy for the
               | terminally online bullshit that I'm seeing coming from
               | the banned users.
               | 
               | Anyways, I feel we're apart on this issue. Feel free to
               | have the last word if you wish.
        
               | jrflowers wrote:
               | > Doing the pancakes/waffles thing in the thread about
               | pancakes/waffles is so fucking on the nose
               | 
               | Wait what do you think "the pancakes/waffles thing"
               | refers to? You posted 2 hours ago that you had never
               | heard of it.
               | 
               | I can see that how it could be confusing because there's
               | "the pancakes/waffles thing" where Jay wrote about about
               | people complaining to the CEO when the moderation team
               | doesn't respond as being equivalent to that meme, and
               | then there's "the pancakes/waffles thing" where Jay
               | started posting pictures of pancakes and waffles as some
               | sort of... joke or dunk? I never quite got the 4D comedy
               | chess there.
               | 
               | It doesn't seem like anybody is "doing the
               | pancakes/waffles thing" in either case. Nobody is asking
               | Jay, as CEO, to ban anyone in the thread about Jay not
               | being the CEO anymore. And I don't think I've seen anyone
               | ironically posting metahumor pictures of pancakes.
               | 
               | The term has become so overused that definition creep now
               | means that it could mean "anything that might bother Jay"
               | in this context.
        
               | easterncalculus wrote:
               | > instead, they chose to mock their userbase
               | 
               | It's a CEO's personal account. CEOs do this on Twitter
               | all the time without it becoming a techcrunch article.
               | 
               | Let's just be honest about what happened - the CEO of
               | Bluesky gave a (still not proportionally as) absurd
               | response to an extremely absurd harassment campaign.
               | That's what this and the article intentionally obscure.
               | 
               | Again, this is never how the web was supposed to work,
               | and it (BARELY) holding on to that is the real story.
        
               | mossTechnician wrote:
               | The central complaint doesn't seem to be distaste, but
               | rather the fact that he is uniquely privileged over other
               | users, despite violating Bluesky's terms of service.[0]
               | 
               | [0]: https://www.change.org/p/bluesky-must-enforce-its-
               | community-...
        
               | Levitz wrote:
               | The central complaint isn't "distaste" because you can't
               | call for someone to be banned because of a "distaste".
               | 
               | "Jesse Singal has distributed private medical information
               | on Bluesky without the consent of the patient" translates
               | to publishing a quote from a patient included in a
               | therapist's letter of support for hormones.
               | 
               | The problem in this situation is that _the complaint
               | itself_ as well as the whole drama surrounding the person
               | is an exercise of harassment _towards Singal_. In this
               | context, I don 't think that saying "waffles" is out of
               | order. I'm not sure of what else can be done about
               | crybullying, since by its very nature innocent bystanders
               | would be surely affected if action was taken against
               | those complaining.
        
               | mossTechnician wrote:
               | Distributing private medical information without consent
               | is a violation of Bluesky's terms.
               | 
               | And to me, that sounds like a much more concrete example
               | of someone being a bully.
        
               | zdragnar wrote:
               | Is it private if it is in a public affidavit?
        
               | mossTechnician wrote:
               | In my opinion, inappropriately leaked information should
               | probably be considered private. But even if not, Singal
               | says the same leaker directly contacted him with a _new_
               | leak, which he also published.
        
               | Levitz wrote:
               | >"Don't use Bluesky Social to break the law or cause harm
               | to others,"
               | 
               | Is this, quoted in the change.org, the relevant line?
               | 
               | The law was not broken, it is also fairly evident that
               | the intention was not to "cause harm to others", nor has
               | any harm has seemingly come upon the patient for this (it
               | requires a huge stretch of imagination to think of a case
               | in which it could)
        
               | tekla wrote:
               | Why do people keep lying about this?
               | 
               | He pulled a quote from a publically available affidavit.
               | 
               | There was no identifying information whatsoever either.
        
               | easterncalculus wrote:
               | Yeah here's the problem with this argument:
               | 
               | 1. People want him banned for any and no reason, so this
               | is a post-hoc justification. The same people (let's be
               | real, likely including you) wanted Singal banned the
               | second he made his account.
               | 
               | 2. This change.org petition, despite proving how many
               | uninformed people will blindly click agree on a petition,
               | proves nothing about how Singal broke literally any rule
               | anywhere, in law or on Bluesky.
        
               | Karrot_Kream wrote:
               | > Although, I guess that is the audience bluesky was
               | targeting when they first started. So I guess I
               | understand the criticism.
               | 
               | I was in the invite only cohort of Bluesky users and I
               | don't really think so. I think what happened is after the
               | election a bunch of very online, political news addicted
               | anti-Musk folks migrated to Bluesky and created the
               | current culture. Even though I'm pretty sure most folks
               | on the network shared pretty much the same politics, the
               | culture on the network changed completely within a few
               | days of this.
        
               | jmcgough wrote:
               | I think Jesse Singal is an awful person, but Jay
               | responded appropriately there.
        
             | rakovsky89 wrote:
             | they keep misgendering me
        
             | easterncalculus wrote:
             | There aren't really any, the user you're replying to is
             | just disappointed the campaign to ban users for no (on
             | platform, or really any) reason was not successful.
        
               | CactusBlue wrote:
               | I don't care about the specific situation either way;
               | What I am observant of is how the core team has handled
               | their userbase and lack of protocol robustness.
        
           | jauntywundrkind wrote:
           | Meh. People are going to antagonize themselves. Trying to win
           | em all is a fools game.
           | 
           | I wrote this to a discord on the 7th:
           | 
           | > _i know it 's so obviously stupid, but i like that they are
           | having fun with being online, even if it is at their users
           | expense. and omg the users are so so awful to them, so much.
           | again, it seems obviously bad to do, but i can't help but
           | want them to keep at having fun online anyways._
           | 
           | That was in semi private. I'd de-enohazize the expense part
           | seirously, I'd spin it a little differently now, emphasizing
           | more the Douglas Adams nature of it all:
           | 
           | > _In the beginning, the universe was created. This has made
           | a lot of people angry, and been widely regarded as a bad
           | move._
           | 
           | But that is also not owning it either, and I think this is an
           | ownable lesson in just being human too, in deciding whether
           | online mediums are corporate, lawyer, marketing, and engineer
           | checked reviewed approved and wise correct words, or whether
           | there must be some permission to be ourselves online, and
           | some expectations that people are only human, and we should
           | be thankful they are sharing their human experiences with us
           | or not. It's not just having fun: _whether we can be
           | ourselves online is in question._ Whether that is socially
           | allowed.
           | 
           | (And generally I haven't found the character of the team to
           | be deeply off. They haven't been, in my view, going out of
           | their way to create injury, but they have been sharing sides
           | that people have never wanted to hear!)
           | 
           | I see how this has been a bad taste for some. And I don't
           | want to belittle your feelings here at all. Yes being more
           | correct would be the wise obvious choice. Ultimately though I
           | think these team member's are more beholden to remaining
           | human, having fun, enjoying themselves.
           | 
           | And to creating (to credit another soul in the discord)
           | _personal_ / compsable moderation & filter systems (not top
           | down enforcement!) such that they can enjoy being a "main
           | character" online (like it or not), even in the midst of
           | strident focused directed continual hostility. Which is a
           | capability atproto is truly uniquely without compare set up
           | to support & enable.
           | 
           | Props to the team. Please keep posting. Sorry about humanity.
           | Sorry to people who are upset and turned off by this. No one
           | is perfect, we work with what we got, and our responses are
           | human and our own and valid, whether they are the wisest
           | sharpest most all correct choice or no. With the good willing
           | souls, we work towards synthesis & understanding; hopefully
           | all sides find that agreeable.
        
           | yuestion wrote:
           | The most vocal and obnoxious of the Bluesky userbase get
           | antagonized by pretty much anything. Pleasing that lot is a
           | fruitless task.
           | 
           | What Bluesky should do now is focus on expanding their
           | userbase away from this particular group of insufferables.
        
             | CactusBlue wrote:
             | As a startup founder, your userbase is your god. Either
             | treat them with utmost respect, or learn to explicitly fire
             | your customers.
        
               | jauntywundrkind wrote:
               | You have more than one user base.
               | 
               | You have to make hard product decisions about which user
               | bases to serve.
        
             | marxisttemp wrote:
             | They should focus on implementing ActivityPub instead of
             | their useless proprietary protocol
        
               | danabramov wrote:
               | It's not "proprietary", it's openly specified and is
               | literally being taken to IETF:
               | https://docs.bsky.app/blog/taking-at-to-ietf
               | 
               | Also, unlike ActivityPub, it's _actually useful_ for
               | building features that normal people expect from social
               | apps -- for example, algorithmic feeds and search, and a
               | single interlinked world (rather than fragmented
               | "servers").
        
         | Dracophoenix wrote:
         | Since you're now focusing on the AT protocol, will E2EE/OTR
         | become a priority?
        
           | danabramov wrote:
           | There's a recent post by Daniel (who works on atproto) on why
           | E2EE is not a current focus:
           | https://dholms.leaflet.pub/3meluqcwky22a
        
             | big_toast wrote:
             | Is there any discussion somewhere about adding in the data
             | that makes the x.com/twitter recommend/ranker so
             | functional?
             | 
             | The "Grok-based Transformer"[0] that uses
             | P(click/dwell/not_interested/photo_expand/video_view) seems
             | pretty important and I can't tell how atproto is capturing
             | it. I use @spacecowboy17.bsky.social's For You and from
             | what I understand that feed wouldn't get that data?
             | 
             | [0]:https://github.com/xai-org/x-algorithm?tab=readme-ov-
             | file#sc... (this isn't an endorsement of grok/x, it's more
             | that the transformer recommender has been very steerable
             | via those signals in my experience)
             | 
             | (I also struggle with the omni-purpose likes - endorsement,
             | approval, discover-algorithm-input. Maybe a more prominent
             | more/less button addresses this, but then provides less
             | network signal.)
        
         | egorfine wrote:
         | Is the new blocking age verification page the kind of
         | innovation we should expect from BlueSky?
        
         | ChicagoDave wrote:
         | If there was an Internet Technology hall of fame, your work
         | with atproto would qualify.
         | 
         | One big innovation is to drag a large bank or Stripe on board
         | to enable payments on the network.
         | 
         | Good luck!
        
         | yieldcrv wrote:
         | I'm glad you were able to reach your goal, been following your
         | professional journey since I met you at a silicon valley event
         | 10 years ago, looking forward to what you do with the ecosystem
        
         | yuestion wrote:
         | With the new CEO in place, are there any plans to deal with the
         | obnoxious userbase of Bluesky, and perhaps try to expand it out
         | to reach people who don't exhibit such high levels of toxicity?
        
           | whattheheckheck wrote:
           | Yeah its the same plans Elon has for X
        
         | marxisttemp wrote:
         | Why did you deliberately steal Mastodon's thunder? Why don't
         | you support ActivityPub?
        
       | user3939382 wrote:
       | It's a social network premised on not liking Elon Musk as far as
       | I remember. The inverse is not true, Twitter user adoption as far
       | as I can tell is not primarily driven by left/right political
       | fanaticism. Not sure what reason it even has to exist.
        
       | Devasta wrote:
       | Bluesky is very strange, it's got potential to endure as a fairly
       | popular social media site but it's kinda obvious that it's staff
       | are contemptuous of their users.
       | 
       | The intended audience was meant to be blockchain weirdos with
       | encyclopedic knowledge of the age of consent in every state, but
       | instead they are stuck with a core userbase of Furries and LGBT
       | people.
       | 
       | They don't know how to fix this, so they'll be stuck floundering
       | for a while to come trying and failing to return to their core
       | mission.
        
       | nout wrote:
       | It's nice to be on a network that doesn't have a CEO or a board.
       | I think this is why Nostr is really something different and more
       | important.
        
       | ChrisArchitect wrote:
       | While I definitely appreciate the sentiments of ATproto and a bit
       | more openness of Bluesky as a platform for development fun and
       | perks like domain verification etc...... having to relive all of
       | the development that we went thru with Twitter for over a decade
       | as they 'build in the open' is frustrating. The network effects
       | are there (which are super important to break out of silos and
       | gain explorability) a bit more thanks to the centralization and
       | hashtags (moreso that the go nowhere Fediverse) but there's a
       | bigger hole: say what you want about daily user numbers, so much
       | mainstream and big accounts are just not there. From news
       | organizations (including the ones that are there that post
       | 'selectively') to politicians, sports like some others have
       | mentioned, entertainment and more. Abandoned accounts, or just
       | not there. A chunk of the conversation (or even the 'fight') and
       | reachability of those entities, even the usefulness of having an
       | official source on the platform for their content, is not there
       | in many instances. And I don't know why this isn't a major focus
       | for growth and legitimacy. Hope there's some more direction on
       | that if you want it to be anything other than an 'escape' for
       | left-leaning people and those looking for a bit more independence
       | over their profiles.
        
       | guywithahat wrote:
       | This makes sense, they've had a lot of issues with cp and have
       | generally developed a poor reputation for their user-base and
       | bans. It seems more like a systemic issue to me rather than a CEO
       | issue, but I suppose all issues start at the CEO level in some
       | regard
        
       | alexose wrote:
       | Toni is very well regarded among Automattic employees. I'm
       | personally stoked to see him work on Bluesky.
        
       | dzhiurgis wrote:
       | Maybe they can finally crack down on communist symbols. IDK how
       | they haven't been investigated in most of Europe yet.
        
       | ElijahLynn wrote:
       | Clickbaity headline: Seems more accurate to stay stepping to the
       | left, instead of stepping down. Stepping down implies leaving the
       | company, which is not the case as Jay is moving into the Chief
       | Innovation Officer role.
        
       | arbglhcs0 wrote:
       | LOL
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-03-09 23:00 UTC)