A photograph of a short-eared owl mid-flight was the last Instagram post biology professor Carl Bergstrom shared before announcing his departure from the platform Jan. 10.
When I first got a Bluesky account, back when it was invite-only a whole bunch of the Physicists and Astronomers I used to follow on Twitter were already there. If anything it seemed like scientists were early adopters.
I would prefer any ActivityPub instance, but press media (and in general private entities), to which scientific institutes intend diffusion, is moving to bluesky...
Bluesky is just...better than any Fediverse microblogging platform. In terms of UI, discoverability, and keeping a balance of users in the community.
Mastodon sucks for regular people. And none of the other better platforms like Firefish ever gain enough steam to beat Mastodon because of existing issues in the structure of the Fediverse and ActivityPub (this also includes Mastodon itself to an extent).
The only reason why it doesn't get as much traction is because it doesn't manipulate your dopamine and serotonin receptors like other networks do with their black box algorithms that are designed to steal as much of your attention as possible, while almost certainly throwing you into an unhealthy filterbubble/echochamber.
I believe you've hit the nail on the head, the only people I've noticed that really want such a social media account are generally people who were older than millennial, out of Millennials, gen Z and gen A, I don't really see much interest in a social media account that is directly linked to your actual identity. Most of them are more interested in a pseuado-anonymous style account that only asks for a username and doesn't actually link you to a real world identity.
Facebook was great in principle, it was intended as like a college student community and evolved from there, it was never meant to fill the goal of what the platform is doing today.
As such as Facebook deteriorates, there isn't a huge demand for a Facebook alternative, because the people who are leaving the platform aren't actively seeking to replace what is lost.
There's a couple contenders but they're not very good. I think most FOSS people don't WANT a facebook alternative; they'd prefer to keep their IRL identity separate from the internet. And the people who don't care also don't care enough to want to go federated.
There's spacehey as a myspace alternative though. That's pretty neat but it's full of teenagers unfortunately.
While there has been some onboarding QOL stuff for mastodon, Bluesky still has them beat on that.
The "People" segment in the explore menu is a nice start, but it's still dependent on the users picking a server that somewhat matches their interests.
thing is lot of that is on purpose. mastodon and fediverse are more of an attempt to come back to the state where there is no algorithm picking for you... but too many people nowdays are simply too lazy to search and actively choose what they want to see.
what we really need is to separate content (keep that in fediverse) and content access and presentation (the interface people use to access the content). if you want a bot feeding you content whole day and for your internet to become a tv you nobody can stop you. but if you want to think amd search nobody should stop you either
The thing is, bluesky is just old twitter, it will become X eventually...Bluesky sucks, but jessus, mastodon sucks in terms of usability. Its only for technical people and experience on mastodon is fatal compared to bluesky, sad that mastodon won't take over, as it could...at least bluesky is not bad YET.
Bluesky has a lot more normies on it while mastodon is mostly early-adopter types. Mastodon, in my experience, is either very technical people (software engineers and other tech people) or very political people. Bluesky has normal people on it
I checked out threads for a day and I liked it because the algorithm wasn't jamming a bunch of outrage content down my throat but that's the only thing I can say about it. Haven't used it since then (deleted my entire meta account)
At least Bluesky is a public benefit corporation, so they at least have to consider the public good in their decision-making and not just profit. May not be much, but it's a start.
Actually, when you tell people something is a start but it is actually a false start that doesn't deliver on the fundamental promises at all, it is much worse than having a much slower start....
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.
Or know how. Just because they are scientists doesn't mean that they are necessarily particularly computer literate. I once had to explain to a university professor that wireless electricity doesn't exist, and the Wi-Fi is only for internet. So yeah.
while I agree, the reality of the situation is that when you get down to comparing feature to feature, open source solutions tend to be technically inferior to proprietary ones.
I use linux because I hate microsoft, not because it's more feature complete than windows (it isn't).
I use lemmy because I hate u/spez, not because it's more feature complete than reddit (it isn't).
I use blender because it's free and it's actually kinda great, if all free and open source software was like blender, then it would be a no-brainer to use FOSS all of the time, and it would be easy to convince the normies to do the same.
also also
I'm using linux mint, i have minor complaints about it, but nothing worse than what microsoft is currently doing with windows. It's just different, and that bothers me. middle click paste is the bane of my existence, but other people swear by it. Just before I switched over, I learned about windows 10's built in emoji keyboard, and I really liked that. A year later (literally last week) I discovered a program that does most of what the windows emoji thingy did, and I can manually edit a keybind for the function to accomplish amost the same thing. FOSS, yay, it's free if you don't value your time in currency amounts. FOSS could be so good if only it were good.
while I agree, the reality of the situation is that when you get down to comparing feature to feature, open source solutions tend to be technically inferior to proprietary ones.
Yes. But there is nothing bluesky does that mastodon doesn't. It's a platform to write short text posts and have it viewed by other people. It's not rocket science.
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
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.
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.
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 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?
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.
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.
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.
Jack Dorsey never had ownership (just directed an investment) and left the board (didn't agree with moderation, lol)
Jay also isn't majority owner.
It's a public benefit corporation too so they don't have a profit requirement.
The harder parts with decentralizing content-addressed systems like it is scaling open spaces (like how a microblog is technically one big shared space). You need big caches and big indexes. They're working actively on making it easier for others to run those app servers. There's already a few independent projects building them. Federating account hosting and feed generation and moderation services are all live already
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!
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.
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
From what I can find Twitter has around 500 million users monthly, meanwhile Bluesky has less than 30 million total users... I've seen public figures who are outspoken against Trump and Musk, some who even called them Nazis, still using twitter but not Bluesky or Mastodon. And I even see people on Lemmy post screenshots from Twiiter posts.
So, clearly, the vast majority of people have not left, and those who did are just going for another centralized platform that is likely to suffer from the same problems as Twitter in the future. And all this about a decade too late, as another user said.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
The Fediverse experience starts with an unanswerable question: what server do you want to be on?
This is such a cop out and makes no sense. A "server" is basically just a website. The only reason we call them servers/instances is because they are are running the same software in the background and can communicate with each other - that's it. So we put them all under common flags such as "Mastodon" for those who use the Mastodon "template", and "Fediverse" for all the "templates" that can communicate with each other.
This is literally just a problem with marketing and communication, people hear "instances"/"servers" and they shit themselves because they can't be bothered to do a bit of research. In reality they are just different websites that can communicate with each other. You have the "shakedown.social" website, the "dads.cool" website, the "bookwyrm.social" website, and plenty of others; they are all Twitter clones (Mastodon) and they all allow you to see the content posted on the others.
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 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.
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 trusted 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.
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.
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.
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.
FOSS is the final destination after people get sick of capitalism ruining every other app/site.
People usually don't go back to shitty products unless they have no choice. Linux users don't go back to Windows. I'll never use an Adobe product again. Etc.
Look at Linux's popularity over the years decades. I've used it since I was 10 years old twenty years ago. It is absolutely climbing. FOSS hasn't even peaked yet lol
FOSS 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.
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.
From what I understand, Bsky didn't actually provide much (if any) OSS code to create the federated apps, just the protocol. So there would need to be tons of work done to create it. Some people were (rightly) pointing out that time might be better spent improving existing solutions like Mastodon, rather than freely providing more value to a for-profit company.
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.