It’s quite a shame where Bluesky ended up. Having infrastructure be neutral was a core tenant of the way it was originally pitched, and is why the whole “labeler for moderation” thing was built at all. They’ve ended up rebuilding Mastadon with the insane cross-instance blocking wars.
There’s a debate raging over in the Bluesky world about whether or not infrastructure providers on ATprotocol should be neutral carriers or if people running things like PDS servers should be able to choose who they host.
It’s an interesting read and worth thinking about. From a Nostr perspective it’s like arguing for a custodial system then being upset at the power dynamics that exist because of that.
I’m curious what folks think. I think the poster kicked a hornets nest, not understanding how communities of users react to being told what they should or shouldn’t do with their own servers.
Thoughts?
https://gist.github.com/burningtree/d4aa172470293bdf2939c993cf48bbd4
View quoted note →
