Genuine question, considering you can already do what you're talking about with ActivityPub what makes you stick around on ATproto/Bsky?
Genuine question, considering you can already do what you're talking about with ActivityPub what makes you stick around on ATproto/Bsky?
I believe the architectural model of ActivityPub is bad. I think the architectural model of atproto is good. Everything is downstream of that.
I don’t have time to elaborate at this exact moment, but figured I’d at least give you a preliminary answer.
ActivityPub is a W3C standard which uses standard, “boring”, sometimes “complex” (JSON-LD) technologies.
The fact the AT protocol does things smarter doesn’t mean it should, or will, be used on the WWW. There’s a reason why we still use e-mail and JSON for interoperability, instead of smarter technology.
We should favor standards IMHO, even if they’re imperfect.
Anyway, I’m really curious about your analysis in your future comments!
Being fit for purpose is more important than being "standard", if a standard doesn't do what it needs to do, that it's standard is irrelevant. Bluesky/atproto uses a ton of standard approaches where appropriate, and innovates where appropriate.
Standards are borne out of usage, and a need to interoperate. Being blessed by a standards body doesn't inherently mean something is good. I can represent some data in JSON, or in HTML, but because both are standards doesn't mean that they're equally good. Standardization is a means to an end, not an inherent good in and of itself. People need to try new things in order to eventually produce new standards.
Ironically, JSON came out of one language, and didn't come from any standards body, like ActivityPub. It wasn't until ECMA-404 (2013) that JSON got a standard from one of the bodies.
It's a good example of technology that came from outside the typical standards, but was eventually adopted by a large portion of the ecosystem, and eventually became a standard. Just like HTML :)