xigoi
Bluesky allows me to use my domain as my identity and make my own moderation decisions without having to run my own instance.
The difference is that you won’t find yourself unable to send an e-mail because the admin of your e-mail server doesn’t like someone from the recipient’s e-mail server.
If you're on Hubzilla or (streams), and you've grokked it enough to use it accordingly, then you can actually post content in private to only selected users.
Okay, but then Meta won’t be able to see it even if you federate with Threads (unless you share the content with Threads users), so I still don’t see your point.
That choice is tied to your identity and can’t be easily changed later, which is what I’m complaining about.
The content you post on the fediverse is already public. You’re not giving Meta any less information by defederating.
You can choose a different moderation service. That’s the point.
But worse than anyone being able to follow that person because they’re using a platform where moderation is separate from identity, as in AtProto.
The Fediverse is, by definition, anything that supports ActivityPub. If BlueSky supported ActivityPub – which is what the bridge was meant to accomplish – then it would be a part of the Fediverse.
By using the Fediverse, you implicitly opt in to having your content federated between different platforms. How is this any different?
Seeing the reaction to the bridge, it seems that most Mastodon users don’t want AtProto to be compatible with ActivityPub.