We're yet to see how this turns out in practice. I do fear that the ATProto model means that Bluesky is still a pretty central component in the ecosystem. Mastodon, in comparison, seems to be more resiliant to one 'instance' screwing things up.
If Bluesky shut down all their servers tomorrow with no notice, what will happen to the network? If Mastodon shut down their servers (mastodon.social), users on that instance would be screwed, but me and many of the people I follow aren't on there so we would be fine.
Focusing on the things that are good and beautiful and making the future better than today would be a good start for someone with your mindset.
Obviously it’d be nice if it was the first social network not to either implode (Livejournal, Tumblr, Twitter), or fade into irrelevance (Friendster, Bebo, MySpace, Digg), or just ossify into mind-numbing tedium (Facebook, LinkedIn), but, well, if it does, presumably there’ll be another one along at some point.
(I realise that you could probably argue Digg either way, here. Digg had a multi-paradigm end.)
If they keep making them, I'll go with it.
I don't think that they're making identical mistakes, but we can't assume that it will last.
> one of bluesky’s mottos is “the company is a future adversary,” so we have to design this service in a way that preserves user choice & freedom
> users should own their data, identity, and relationships on the social internet, and devs should never get locked out of the ecosystems that they build
https://bsky.app/profile/emilyliu.me/post/3jzkm4kezos2d
For all the shrill man-child cries of 'censorship!', there's protocols underlying already for you to host yourself! People do! Heavens spare us from these X-grade losers.
These folks can go run their own PDS! But generally I think nothing of value was lost, that the network has rightly refused to let itself be degraded.
If you get no engagement because you're on everyone's blocklist well that can't be on anyone except you since every user opts in to them.