The data is not transferring, but the user is. When I sign up for e.g. Twitter, I don't want to sign up for Mastodon, or Bluesky, or Truth Social, or whatever other platform someone might create later. Thus I would not choose to put my data in a PDS. I feel like that would actually leave me with less ownership and control than I have now.

My point is that I don't believe the separation of frontend and data is desirable for a social network. I want to know that I am on a specific platform that gives me some degree of control and guarantee (to the extent that I trust that platform) over how my data is represented. I don't really have to worry that it's showing up in any number of other places that I didn't sign up for (technically I do since everything public can be scraped of course, but in practice there are safeguards that go out the window when you explicitly create something like a PDS).

▲

danabramov 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Do I understand correctly that your main concern is that some random service would serve a page when asked for /your-handle, and so, given a link, someone may assume that you actively use that service? Just trying to understand the exact scenario.

Generally it's good practice for AT apps to treat you as not signed up if you have not explicitly signed up to this app before. So I think a well-behaved site you never used shouldn't show your profile page on request. If this is right, maybe it needs to be more emphasized in docs, templates, etc. Same as they should correctly handle lifecycle events like account getting deactivated.

Realistically it's possible some services don't do this well but it's not clear to me that this is going to be a major problem. Like if it gets really bad, it seems like either this will get fixed or people will adjust expectations about how profile pages work.

▲

dameis 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I think part of the issue is that humans are hyper conditioned to expect a certain UX and set of conditions thanks to the past 3 decades of the internet + legacy social media. It only feels weird that you could publish content on Bluesky and have it show up on some other app without your consent because of how we've been conditioned. There will be a lot of unconditioning and reconditioning that has to take place over a span of time if the ATmosphere (or any new vision of social media) wants to succeed.

https://anisota.net will display any Bluesky content and profiles without the consent of the user — no one cares at the moment though because either 1) they don't know about such a niche project, or 2) they aren't concerned cause I'm not a controversial figure.

If Truth Social was suddenly a part of the ATmosphere or a part of some other wide network of users, most people would catch on eventually and be hopefully conditioned to realize that the mere presence of someone's content on an app/site doesn't mean they use that app/site

	▲	danabramov an hour ago \| parent [-]
		FWIW, I think Anisota is a bit different because conceptually people see it as a Bluesky client. So it is expected that you're "projecting" Bluesky, for better or worse. Whereas if it's some fanart exchange service or something, maybe it makes less sense. Maybe it just depends on what you think the user would expect.