this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2024
222 points (96.2% liked)

Asklemmy

43864 readers
1464 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I's heard news that BlueSky has been growing a lot as Xitter becomes worse and worse, but why do people seem to prefer BlueSky? This confuses me because BlueSky does not have any federalization technologies built into it, meaning it's just another centralized platform, and thus vulnerable to the same things that make modern social media so horrible.

And so, in the hopes of having a better understanding, I've come here to ask what problems Mastodon has that keep people from migrating to it and what is BlueSky doing so right that it attracts so many people.

This question is directed to those who have used all three platforms, although others are free to put out their own thoughts.

(To be clear, I've never used Xitter, BlueSky or Mastodon. I'm asking specifically so that I don't have to make an account on each to find out by myself.)


Edit:

Edit2: (changed the wording a bit on the last part of point 1 to make my point clearer.)

From reading the comments, here are what seems to be the main reasons:

  1. Federation is hard

The concept of federation seems to be harder to grasp than tech people expected. As one user pointed out, tech literacy is much less prevalent than tech folk might expect.

On Mastodon, you must pick an instance, for some weird "federation" tech reason, whatever that means; and thanks to that "federation" there are some post you cannot see (due to defederalization). To someone who barely understands what a server is, the complex network of federalization is to much to bare.

BlueSky, on the other hand, is simple: just go to this website, creating an account and Ta Da! Done! No need to understand anything else.

~~The federalized nature of Mastodon seems to be its biggest flaw.~~

The unfamiliar and more complex nature of Mastodon's federalization technology seems to be its biggest obstacle towards achieving mass adoption.

  1. No Algorithm

Mastodon has no algorithm to surface relevant posts, it is just a chronological timeline. Although some prefer this, others don't and would rather have an algorithm serving them good quality post instead of spending 10h+ curating a subscription feed.

  1. UI and UX

People say that Mastodon (and Lemmy) have HORRIBLE UX, which will surely drive many away from Mastodon. Also, some pointed out that BlueSky's overall design more closely follows that of Twitter, so BlueSky quite literally looks more like pre-Musk Xitter.

(page 4) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Mastodon is ideologically sound, but has not nailed the UX

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I’m gonna echo what others have said here. The mastodon signup process is too complex, and searching for instructions just leads to “what is the fediverse and/or activitypub” explainers.

I created a mastodon account a few years ago and it was my first introduction to the fediverse. It was frustrating and I only persevered because I REALLY wanted to replace twitter.

Once I got it set up, I realized that no one who I followed on twitter was there. My feed is currently like 2 people, plus a bunch of dead accounts from people who dipped their toe in but didn’t stay.

Joining Bluesky was simple, and there were already a bunch of accounts I wanted to follow. The recent influx has increased that, and it feels a lot like old school twitter without the nazis.

People originally joined twitter (and stuck with it for so long) because that’s where everyone else is. Mastadon is too clunky join and use, so people aren’t.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 72 points 1 day ago (1 children)

People expecting a new Twitter when switching to Mastodon were met with weird behavior and nerds who told them the awful search function or weird comment count is working correctly because that's how federation works. Well if that's the case then federation is shit.

[–] [email protected] 58 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

This is unfortunately the world of open-source.

  1. Nerd tells you to use the open-source thing.
  2. Non-technical tries it and asks questions
  3. Nerd proclaims it's not a real problem/your fault/not applicable/fix it yourself
  4. Some company takes that open-source version or idea, makes it easier for end users and monetize it
  5. Nerd gets angry and repeats step 1

Source: I am nerd and I contribute to open-source.

[–] [email protected] 38 points 1 day ago (1 children)

.....BlueSky does not have any federalization technologies built into it, meaning it's just another centralized platform, and thus vulnerable to the same things that make modern social media so horrible.

Ask your average social media user what any of that means and you'll get blank stares.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

the average social media user wants to know what face cream Kim Kardashian uses, follows Cristiano Ronaldo and thinks you should go back to your own country.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 day ago (1 children)

People don't care about federation. Or vendor lock-in.

I haven't tried bluesky, but mastodon seems a little broken by design. I'd you go to a post you are always told that the host server may have more replies. Things like that make it seem immature and perhaps just a bad solution compared to a monolithic approach.

If you don't like the instance (why wouldn't I?) you can just move to a different one. Yes, and restart my network. It's not really a good solution. I would like to exist on mastodon and just use some server. If I don't like it, continue somewhere else.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago

I'd you go to a post you are always told that the host server may have more replies

Just yesterday I opened a post on Masto that had 80 boosts. I went to my home instance to boost it, and it said 10 boosts. I get that things will sometimes be out of sync due to federation and I don't think those numbers need to be exactly the same, but that's a huge difference.

If you don't like the instance (why wouldn't I?) you can just move to a different one. Yes, and restart my network. It's not really a good solution.

Yep. I've moved several times and the process sucks. It's ridiculous that your posts and followers don't follow you. It's technically possible to do it: just give every account a public/private key pair for identity, and if you migrate to a new instance your public/private key pair come with you so you can prove that you are still you, and then there should be no problem bringing your posts and followers to the new instance. But despite the fact that switching instances is a core feature of the Fediverse, the process sucks.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Because people I want to follow are on Bluesky?

(I mean, duh? Did you really need people to state that?!)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I agree with the other commenter's points, but one thing I think people forget to mention is that BlueSky feels like Twitter in a way Mastodon just doesn't. When I am trying to pitch Mastodon to people, I usually compare it to Tumblr because the vibes are similar.

Mastodon is also flat out hostile to influencers, and by that I mean the platform is designed to be terrible to influencers. The lack of an alogarithm means you can't game the system, no quote tweets means you get less opportunities to spread, no reply limiting means your notifications are going to be going nuts from the replies. The culture on Mastodon is difficult to game too, since people there expect thoughtful responses to their replies.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Personally I have zero interest in influencers and I’d rather use a platform that isn’t designed to amplify their content. That’s just me.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I mean, same here, but if an influencer migrates from Twitter they usually bring their fans with them.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago

Very true, good point. I’m looking at it from my own selfish point of view. 😁

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 day ago

Exactly. The design, the sign-up process, the colors, the formatting, it's all very pre-Musk-Twitter.

Even the icon is reminiscent!

It's as smooth a transition as you can make it, so no wonder people do it effortlessly.

Meanwhile in camp Mastodon: "Please pick a server" -> tab closed already

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago

People have to choose a server with mastodon, and you can't just pick any server because of the mess of defederations.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Isn't blue sky made by the same people who made Twitter?

It makes sense that people who are leaving twitter because of Elons changes are nostalgic and see that the old Twitter people made a new one so they jump in. Basically name recognition.

(I have only used Twitter)

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›