Terry Frazier on Nostr: #Bluesky #whitepaper I read the Bluesky white paper. Pretty heavy on the corporate ...
#Bluesky #whitepaper
I read the Bluesky white paper. Pretty heavy on the corporate paternalism. At one point they even state (paraphrasing) their users are too dumb to manage keys - like the Delta class in Huxley's Brave New World. Really seems like a group of self-anointed do-gooders out to save the "digital town square" and make the poor, dumb users feel "safe" - which is how we got into this mess in the first place.
The paper's tone is that of an analyst-authored corporate white paper; the architecture one designed by any VC-funded, Sillycon Valley BigTech spinoff with millions to spend. Reading it invokes images (for me) of a group of corporate tech wonks trying to clean the turd out of the centralized social media punchbowl without giving up too much control.
They formed a committee, had some meetings, defined the market requirements, bounded the problem, developed the permissable use cases, wrote the business plan, got some money, built a platform. It's "open source," but all the potential #innovation has been architected out. It reads like Twitter v1.5 - a great pitch for VCs, not so much for innovators.
Bluesky feels like a problem/solution set created by people whose vision of "what can be is heavily burdened by what has been" - which is just weird because I'm pretty sure they're all dedicated Harris-Walz supporters. I can almost visualize their early Zoom meetings sitting around talking about how they have to "save Democracy!" and free the world from "hate speech," misinformation and Donald Trump.
Disclaimer: I have never used Bluesky. Opinions based solely on reading their white paper, Wikipedia page and a few blog posts.
I read the Bluesky white paper. Pretty heavy on the corporate paternalism. At one point they even state (paraphrasing) their users are too dumb to manage keys - like the Delta class in Huxley's Brave New World. Really seems like a group of self-anointed do-gooders out to save the "digital town square" and make the poor, dumb users feel "safe" - which is how we got into this mess in the first place.
The paper's tone is that of an analyst-authored corporate white paper; the architecture one designed by any VC-funded, Sillycon Valley BigTech spinoff with millions to spend. Reading it invokes images (for me) of a group of corporate tech wonks trying to clean the turd out of the centralized social media punchbowl without giving up too much control.
They formed a committee, had some meetings, defined the market requirements, bounded the problem, developed the permissable use cases, wrote the business plan, got some money, built a platform. It's "open source," but all the potential #innovation has been architected out. It reads like Twitter v1.5 - a great pitch for VCs, not so much for innovators.
Bluesky feels like a problem/solution set created by people whose vision of "what can be is heavily burdened by what has been" - which is just weird because I'm pretty sure they're all dedicated Harris-Walz supporters. I can almost visualize their early Zoom meetings sitting around talking about how they have to "save Democracy!" and free the world from "hate speech," misinformation and Donald Trump.
Disclaimer: I have never used Bluesky. Opinions based solely on reading their white paper, Wikipedia page and a few blog posts.