Just finished listening to an interview with @bsky.app CTO @pfrazee.com by @mike on the @dot_social podcast.
-
@jmax @bsky.app @pfrazee.com @mike @dot_social ohhhh I like that idium
-
@liaizon Yeah, like I wrote here, I think it's probably more confusing than helpful to make the term "Fediverse" include Bluesky… https://martianbase.net/@mackuba/114484050397122882
-
-
liaizon@social.wake.st I think I need a Venn diagram for how the terms "fediverse", "open social web", "social web", "indieweb", etc. all relate to one another.
-
-
@liaizon
The Fediverse is a range of different open source softwares, all based on the #activitypub and federated by this protocol which has been designed to allow a federation of independent and totally autonomous instances with full control by their administrators. That's called "decentralisation". -
To be part of the Fediverse, those sofwares must have been conceived in order to allow the decentralisation.
So, #Threads is not in the Fediverse.#BlueSky may become interoperable with the Fediverse and may be considered with gentleness but it will never become a part of the Fediverse.
@bsky.app @pfrazee.com @mike @dot_social @liaizon -
@Nelfan @bsky.app @pfrazee.com @mike @dot_social but you've already in a conversation right now that has participation from people across other protocols. I don't think it makes any sense to define the fediverse in terms of the protocols that it contains. If you can communicate with someone bidirectional and exchange replies and reactions/likes then you are part of the fediverse. But of course we don't actually get to decide what the fediverse "means" as usage grows
-
-
-
nextgraph@fosstodon.org I see, much clearer now
