• Blisterexe@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Because bsky has tons of users, and the ATmosphere is only recently “truly” decentralized. You can argue it is federated, but centralized, but acting as if it’s not decentralized/federated at all is stupid.

    • James R Kirk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      and the ATmosphere is only recently “truly” decentralized

      It’s absolutely not. There is no situation in which 99.999% of users on a single for profit platform can be accurately called decentralized.

      Similarly, “federated” means jack shit when the only thing the for profit bluesky company is federated with are two micro-instances that are fully reliant on the for profit Bluesky company.

      • Blisterexe@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        How are they completely reliant of the bluesky company?

        If bluesky shut down tommorow they would still work, and while bluesky is currently the majority of users, it won’t be forever. If you give it a bit of time, other instances with many users will pop up.

        Like, my whole argument is that you can’t write off a actually decentralized platform completely just because it’s currently centered on one large instance.

        • James R Kirk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          actually decentralized

          currently centered on one large instance.

          You are not behaving rationally.

          • Blisterexe@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            Okay I think we disagree on semantics.

            I think decentralized = anyone can set up their own instance that doesn’t depend on any other instance.

            • James R Kirk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              This is not a disagreement of semantics. You are attempting to redefine a word. You’ll never find a dictionary that uses your definition.

              • Blisterexe@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                9 months ago

                Okay, then what does it mean? What possible other definition could that word have, please be specific.

                  • Blisterexe@lemmy.zip
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    I’m glad we agree! It’s decentralized :)

                    Notice how that website you love linking shows 98%, not 100%