This continues to confirm for me that there's nothing particularly valuable about ATProto, and that some of the percieved "flaws" in models like Mastodon's model are features just as much as bugs.

Honestly, this is making me go further in the other direction, can we just do "twitter but owned by a trust" or something?

▲

lilOnion 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

No we can't. Beacuse at anytime people like Elon Musk can come in and mess everything up. If all of your data is in someones server you are one ban away from becoming noone. Of course that is still true with atproto since majority of users are on bluesky PDS's. But the whole tech is being designed in such a way to prevent such issues while still looking and acting qs traditional social media.

▲

direwolf20 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Isn't that literally Bluesky? A PBC must act in the public interest.

	▲	nightpool an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Not exactly—a PBC is allowed to "balance" shareholder profit with "stakeholder interests. But at the end of the day, the money is still coming from the shareholders, and they're still looking for a return. They're required to be transparent, but that's about it. And there aren't really any penalties for not complying either.

▲

RobotToaster 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Twitter but run by a bunch of NGO PMCs sounds even worse than twitter.

▲

kevin_thibedeau 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The bigots and sociopaths will need a place to exercise their freeze peach. Groups that don't want to be involved with that rancor need a way to evict such people when they are disruptive. Wikipedia hangs on with its NPOV policy. You can't do that on centralized open fora where opinion is the currency of the realm.