this post was submitted on 24 Feb 2025
1479 points (98.5% liked)

Technology

63186 readers
3360 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] deathbird@mander.xyz 5 points 4 hours ago

I mean, I hate BlueSky too, but I think the reason it's more popular than Mastodon is that it's more centralized and in practical terms that means it's easier to adopt and engage with.

The biggest headache I have with Mastodon (and Lemmy, to a lesser extent) is defederation. I understand it's the most practical thing to do sometimes, but it's waaay overdone. Like, there needs to be a culture of only defederating as a last resort due to pratical concerns (e.g. bots I guess). Unfortunately the current culture is one where many instance admins treat defederation as a personal blocklist. I wish more admins would leave it to individual users to decide who to allow or not.

[–] MrMcGasion@lemmy.world 5 points 9 hours ago

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.

[–] Mars2k21@sh.itjust.works 48 points 16 hours ago (8 children)

Going to play devil's advocate here.

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).

[–] x00z@lemmy.world 13 points 11 hours ago

Mastodon is great.

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.

[–] oni@lemm.ee 6 points 11 hours ago

what are those?

existing issues in the structure of the Fediverse and ActivityPub

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] ZombieMantis@lemmy.world 42 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (2 children)

Would be better if it was Mastodon, but I suppose I shouldn't let perfect be the enemy of good, and good riddance to Twitter, indeed.

[–] Sine_Fine_Belli@lemmy.world 3 points 12 hours ago

Same here, well said. Bluesky’s not perfect, at least it’s not Twitter. I wish more people would use it though

[–] shininghero@pawb.social 6 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

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.

[–] grepe@lemmy.world 3 points 12 hours ago

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

[–] lemmus@szmer.info 19 points 16 hours ago

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.

[–] sircac@lemmy.world 8 points 13 hours ago

I would prefer any ActivityPub instance, but press media (and in general private entities), to which scientific institutes intend diffusion, is moving to bluesky...

[–] Realitaetsverlust@lemmy.zip 70 points 21 hours ago (22 children)

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.

[–] Miaou@jlai.lu 3 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Never worked in academia eh? Plenty of dumb (and, more importantly here, computer illiterate) people there too.

[–] Realitaetsverlust@lemmy.zip 3 points 11 hours ago

I'm pretty sure there are a handful of technically literate scientists who are able to install servers lmao.

[–] earphone843@sh.itjust.works 8 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Being a scientist doesn't mean you have the technical knowledge to run a public facing server.

[–] Realitaetsverlust@lemmy.zip 2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Being a scientist kinda means to me you're able to follow a very easy to understand guide to install mastodon on ...

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 1 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

Being a scientist also kinda means understanding what are your strengths, and how you can combine them with other people who are smart along very specific narrow vectors.

Being a scientist means understanding that if you work together with the right kind of smart, curious people you can build amazing things that will improve the world.

Being a scientist in 2025 means understanding the modern business world is utter bullshit and will rot any science it touches to the core.

Being a scientist, like truly living that ethos, means being someone who believes the truth is important and that there are power structures who will fight tooth and nail to subdue that truth or hoard it to themselves for personal gain.

Being a scientist thus effectively means that I would expect that after having a brief conversation with you that you would at least understand the grave danger that entrusting science communication in another for profit social media company poses and how it doesn't seem sensible to take that risk when the actual material barriers to creating Fediverse communities as alternatives aren't actually that high no matter how much it feels like the barriers are impossible and the network effect is unbeatable.

Don't get me wrong, those hurdles are real, the fediverse can be confusing, there are lots of growing pains here.... however, not every scientist needs to become an expert in selfhosting Fediverse software, and not every scientist needs to become a Fediverse evangelist (although it wouldn't hurt), but we do need to connect boldly and clearly the tragic hypocrisy of supposedly truth valuing people (scientists, science communicators and leaders that defend science) all shepherding dutifully onto another platform that will silence and betray them violently.

Scientists are inherently aligned with modern progressive politics, or rather scientists need to understand they are at everything up to physical bodily danger from being hurt by conservatives now and they need to understand that makes them fundamentally aligned with modern progressive politics.

There is no "I don't want to get political here" and the failure of the science community at large to recognize how embracing Bluesky as if it was a genuine solution to the unfolding catastrophe of science being defunded and destroyed is embarrassing. Those of us on the Fediverse should be kind, but also we should make fun of them for not using their brains. They clearly have them. Fucking use them you fools.

Bluesky is a for profit corporate venture, the same EXACT incentives that now have placed us all very much in danger and have placed the very funding structures of science in danger the world over (at least in US/European connected science communities) are at play in Bluesky and Scientists betray the begrudging respect the public has for their intelligence (even if they pretend to hate Scientists) by treating Bluesky like it is safe. Bluesky is not safe. This is no different than scientists endorsing any other thing that is fundamentally a threat to the health and safety of innocent people. It is just new, people are scared and scientists are largely too overwhelmed to see things for how they are.

At the end of the day, every Scientist needs to hear to their face that Bluesky is a threat to science, science education and the free access to knowledge in general the world over, they need to defend their choice to go on Bluesky anyways instead of Mastodon (both is fine tho) along the terms of what motivates their pursuit of studying and doing science. I don't care if scientists are already overwhelmed and scared, they along with everyone else have all the information to understand why choosing Bluesky to throw the weight of science communication behind is dangerous, and it is unacceptable to give them a pass because 2025 is a terrifying mess. 2025 is a terrifying mess for reasons DIRECTLY RELATED TO THIS DISCUSSION. Scientists should understand that better than almost anyone else if they are paying attention, and many do which is why Mastodon is full of scientists!

[–] Natanael@infosec.pub 0 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Bluesky is a public benefit corporation. That's very different from for profit

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

It has investors, those investors are going to want money.

[–] Natanael@infosec.pub 1 points 4 hours ago

Sure, but the openness of the protocols, especially the portability of accounts, makes it hard for them to push negative changes on users.

[–] ubergeek@lemmy.today 25 points 21 hours ago (10 children)

Most scientists aren't allowed to do stuff like that, or purely just don't have the time.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 11 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (19 replies)
[–] DSTGU@sopuli.xyz 19 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

First time seeing HTTP code 451

[–] glitchdx@lemmy.world 21 points 19 hours ago

https://http.cat/status/451

because I needed an explanation of what that means, and I wanted it to be cute and funny.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] misk@sopuli.xyz 114 points 1 day ago (2 children)

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.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] pls@lemmy.plaureano.nohost.me 9 points 17 hours ago (5 children)

I have no clue on the reasons people like Bluesky (or threads). None at all.

[–] shortrounddev@lemmy.world 10 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

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)

[–] MentallyExhausted@reddthat.com 6 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Took me like a day on bluesky to find all the funny people. Never saw any funny people on mastodon. :-(

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Genius@lemmy.zip 29 points 21 hours ago

There's no excuse for using Xittter in 2025.

load more comments
view more: next ›