seufz (@seufz@troet.cafe)
Ich musste mich von einem großen Account anpöbeln lassen, als ich #BlueSky als „falsche Seite“ bezeichnet habe, damals™️.
Tja, geschenkt.
Show Original Post
OchMensch (@OchMensch@norden.social)
Nachdem sich schon Teile rund um MAGA auf Bluesky breit machten, folgt nun auch ICE. Ja, genau, die. Ganz offiziell mit Verifizierung.
Ist ja nun nicht so, dass genau davor (mal wieder) einige gewarnt hatten und es wieder von einigen überhört wurde. Reichweite, und so. Dort ist ja auch mehr los, und so.
Meine kurzzeitige Bridge habe ich wieder abgerissen.
Show Original Post
fedilore (@fedilore@mastodon.social)
Oh, uh, by the way, #BlueSky just gave ICE a 1st party account verification.
Today.
Kind of hard not to read that timing as pretty intentional.
Show Original Post
fedilore (@fedilore@mastodon.social)
Is anybody able to explain to me where "BlueSky verified ICE account" fits into the ATProto stack?
That feels like an AppView thing, but I genuinely have no idea #BlueSky #ATProto
Show Original Post
marynelson8 (@marynelson8@mstdn.social)
I have stopped following the Bluesky bridge.
That is all.
Show Original Post
fuckfetish (@fuckfetish@fuckaas.space)
RE: https://mstdn.social/@Grutjes/115907687819628134
BLUESKY *IS* THE NAZI SITE
#politics #uspol #uspolitics #bluesky
Show Original Post
RememberUsAlways (@RememberUsAlways@newsie.social)
#Bluesky to #ICEsky in the blink of an eye 👁️
#ICE
#NoKings !
Show Original Post
hallunke23 (@hallunke23@troet.cafe)
popped up recently is that Bluesky allowed ICE (Terrorist Organization) to open an account on their platform which might be a good reason for deferating them.
With those 3 issues (ICE, IPv4 and centralized Chat), I think I wouldn't want to federate with Bluesky anymore.
Oh, and btw, my Mastodon account which is bridged to Bluesky, recently was banned by Bluesky. I have no clue why this happened because Bluesky won't tell me.
Show Original Post
hallunke23 (@hallunke23@troet.cafe)
parts that remain to be done:
• Alternative instances need own Relay and AppView -> should be feasable
• Alternative instances need their own servers for private messages -> This is still a problem. How are you supposed to chat with someone if another instance can't find your chat server?
• Bluesky still needs to adopt IPv6 -> This is also a problem. IPv4 is slowly heading for its end, and I wouldn't want to rely on IPv4 for Bluesky federation.
Another issue that popped up
(2/3) @rolle #Bluesky
Show Original Post
ai6yr (@ai6yr@m.ai6yr.org)
Head's up, if you want to disconnect the bridge to Bluesky, here are the instructions. I exercised this option today, as a result of them "blue checking" ICE. I'd never allow Federation of an ActivityPub instance with Nazis on it, and Bluesky is no exception. #Bluesky
https://fed.brid.gy/docs#fediverse-protocol-bot-user-blocked
Show Original Post
hallunke23 (@hallunke23@troet.cafe)
Well, I recently discovered that Bluesky got one step closer to decentralization:
It is now possible to set up DIDs without depending on Bluesky's services. If you look into the AT spec, you will find that there are now two types of DIDs that can be used for Bluesky: did:plc (which can only be issued by Bluesky) and did:web which essentially consist of a domain name. So an AT user of johndoe.example.com could have a DID of did:web:johndoe.example.com.
But now there are at
Show Original Post