Bluesky will face every pressure to be enshittified. Bluesky has even, correctly, acknowledged this. It is up to Bluesky and its community to rise to the challenge of "credible exit" knowing that this is a likely, perhaps inevitable, risk.
The org is indeed a future adversary. So what now?
And here it is. We have reached the final part.
I am not even going to take a tea break. I am not even going to go to the bathroom. I kinda have to, but we are powering through.
We have reached the conclusion of this megathread, and "summary" of an equally long article.
What I will not accept is the goalposts being moved on decentralization and federation. Bluesky is neither decentralized nor federated.
If Bluesky wants to become so, it has an enormous amount of work to do, particularly in terms of architectural design.
Blogs are decentralized, Google is not.
Bluesky will face every pressure to be enshittified. Bluesky has even, correctly, acknowledged this. It is up to Bluesky and its community to rise to the challenge of "credible exit" knowing that this is a likely, perhaps inevitable, risk.
The org is indeed a future adversary. So what now?
There will be a lot of pressure soon from investors: run ads, make premium accounts that do not actually make sense in a decentralized way, so on and so on.
In this way, "credible exit" is the most important thing for Bluesky the organization and its community to push on today
What I will not accept is the goalposts being moved on decentralization and federation. Bluesky is neither decentralized nor federated.
If Bluesky wants to become so, it has an enormous amount of work to do, particularly in terms of architectural design.
Blogs are decentralized, Google is not.
That Bluesky is providing needs for many users who are looking for refuge from a white supremacist site today is something to pause and acknowledge the difficulty and scope of doing so quickly and in the moment. I'm glad Bluesky is here at this stressful geopolitical moment in history.
There will be a lot of pressure soon from investors: run ads, make premium accounts that do not actually make sense in a decentralized way, so on and so on.
In this way, "credible exit" is the most important thing for Bluesky the organization and its community to push on today
Again, this is all tuned to "What is Bluesky trying to build?"
Bluesky might not be a good "decentralized Twitter replacement", but it is a good "Twitter replacement" with the possibility of "credible exit"
That Bluesky is providing needs for many users who are looking for refuge from a white supremacist site today is something to pause and acknowledge the difficulty and scope of doing so quickly and in the moment. I'm glad Bluesky is here at this stressful geopolitical moment in history.
A Public Benefit Corporation has a mission for the public good, but can take investments in the way a nonprofit cannot. This also means it can move much faster. Given the influx of users to Bluesky, taking investments this way may have been the only load handling route available this fast.
Again, this is all tuned to "What is Bluesky trying to build?"
Bluesky might not be a good "decentralized Twitter replacement", but it is a good "Twitter replacement" with the possibility of "credible exit"
The structure of an organization does matter. There's a reason that @spritely@social.coop is a 501(c)(3) in the US. Any money we take in is a donation: we aren't "delivering on an investment" (though we must deliver on results)
Bluesky is a Public Benefit Corporation, also interesting
A Public Benefit Corporation has a mission for the public good, but can take investments in the way a nonprofit cannot. This also means it can move much faster. Given the influx of users to Bluesky, taking investments this way may have been the only load handling route available this fast.
Before we continue further, I have done about every job imaginable in a FOSS project/organization. Fundraising, by far, is the worst, and the most stressful.
It's incredibly hard to raise anything to do anything. I think that's worth acknowledging.
The structure of an organization does matter. There's a reason that @spritely@social.coop is a 501(c)(3) in the US. Any money we take in is a donation: we aren't "delivering on an investment" (though we must deliver on results)
Bluesky is a Public Benefit Corporation, also interesting
This happens despite the very best people with the very best intentions. Talk to early Twitter co-founders and they will tell you the org that things became was not the org that they envisioned.
A future adversary indeed. So we should plan for it today.
Before we continue further, I have done about every job imaginable in a FOSS project/organization. Fundraising, by far, is the worst, and the most stressful.
It's incredibly hard to raise anything to do anything. I think that's worth acknowledging.
And there will be a lot of pressure: Bluesky has taken VC money as investments; the pattern of such is that early on, things are very good and flexible, and after some time, the investors start placing pressure to enshittify.
I have seen good peoples' orgs clawed from their hands. It happens.
This happens despite the very best people with the very best intentions. Talk to early Twitter co-founders and they will tell you the org that things became was not the org that they envisioned.
A future adversary indeed. So we should plan for it today.
Christine Lemmer-Webber