And at every layer except for maybe the PLC directory, there's nothing stopping anyone from fixing that “almost nobody does” problem. The fact that such a thing is even possible, and that it's seamless to move from one to the other, gives ATproto a massive leg-up compared to even other federated systems, let alone its non-federated predecessors.

Yes. Be wary of Bluesky. That’s our whole point. Run the infrastructure on your own. Build separate companies.

Most of the complaints here are just about the cost of scale. You are able to fetch the whole network and its history, and that costs time and money. The only structural centralization is PLC, which is being factored into an independent org.

(Blacksky is the/one of the furthest along in building competing versions of each part of the AT proto stack.)

Yeah, it played out with my whole social circle leaving, as evidenced by the fact that all my friends link me to the bluesky post whenever there's something happening now.

I personally run my own PDS for my friends and I, use my own AppView that fetches from my own Constellation, and rely on an alternative relay. I also don't like PBC's moderation, so I simply disabled it, and even if they block/ban posts or accounts on their part of the network, I still see them. But yes, I would like the DID directory to be decentralized. I still depend on it and can't easily move.

I don't get it. What is this supposed to mean? Is the author implying people won't leave Twitter? If it's true then this whole article is pure waste of time: if people won't switch to BlueSky anyway then why should we be wary of it?

BlueSky is a direct alternative to Twitter. The UI is a spitting image of Twitter's. The whole premise of BlueSky is that people will leave Twitter when it goes bad.

But people do and it is reportedly fairly easy so the majority of people are on Bluesky's layers while all is well. But also I don't understand why any of this is a reason to be "wary", it's a great place to be with some unique technical properties - it is way more "open" than any other platform of similar scale.

Who would've thought true decentralization means everyone hosting their own server? Yes, each user would have to pay and maintain it, but that's the cost of decentralization. ATProto at least makes it easy to jump ship if shit hits the fan and not have to start from scratch. Try doing that with Twitter/Instagram/Etc.

Yeah, I left.

(And in fact I am wary of all social media.)

The bigger danger would be AT Protocol losing its biggest contributor. Unless another VC backed team appeared to fill their shoes, the protocol would stagnate and communities would slowly deteriorate. Hope is critical early on in a protocol's rise to prominence.

They already ban signups using email aliases, and apparently block alias emails to their unban support address too.

Archived: https://archive.ph/PsTrp

But they migrated to Bluesky, right? So it played out fine?

1. Strongly encourage backups.

2. Force users to migrate off the "official" PDS until it has less than, say, 40% market share.

3. Make the mobile apps use third-party relay/appview by default (could be randomized).

I don't care if Bluesky goes away, gets bought, whatever.

Social media is disposable like a retail outlet. I'm sad if the coffee shop around the corner goes out of business, but there are 99K coffee shops in the US. I can go to another one.

As it is, I don't use Meta or X.. because they're led by despicable beings. Bluesky gets a pass for now, and has enough interesting people that I show up and have a chat. Like a coffee shop or a bar.

Either you handle the cryptography for the user AND allow them to DIY it or your target demographic is purely crypto anarchists willing to put up with a shitty UX.

Sounds like he was worried so much he left Bluesky already.

The other problem of who owns the relay where the data is stored still exists. One way to solve this is a scheduled query of your data and keeping a local dump

It's true that many p2p attempts have failed, but it's also the only solution that doesn't require someone running servers for free. There's evidence of success as well: napster (and bittorrent). Both were wildly successful, and ultimately died because of legal issues. It might work when the data is yours to share.

This is a for-profit company running this service. It ain't free to operate.

If you don't like that, go elsewhere.

If there is one thing that has been a resounding success on the internet it is this: free services that you pay for with your clicks. Just look at the plethora of free services you get.

In no other economy would that be even remotely possible.

This is an odd take and hard to agree with. I have never seen anyone complaining that email is a centralised service. GMail might be among the most popular solution, but there is a number of other solutions for "regular consumers", and many institutions, governments, etc. all run their email servers.

Don't they have to give you your data upon request? And the cheapest way is to offer an export function? Wasn't this thanks to the EU (GDPR Article 20)?

> It will be hard, but we'll self host if we have to

Bluesky offers:

> It will be easy-ish, and we'll self host if we have to

We shall see if it's credible enough to make corruption look elsewhere.

I used to believe most people grew past this ape part of their brain some time between preschool and kindergarten, shortly after you stopped crying while hungry. On X and similarly on Bluesky all users lack emotional development. e.g. Kevin's last post begging people not to hate him. It's feels like walking front door and -50C and the ground is a red desert. You're from mars.

This isn't on corporations or governments to regulate. This isn't on other people to move to your preferred clone. This is on YOU to use better software.

And don't even get me started on the "value" these apps provide

arguably it cheapens engagement and connections. Say you post that you're going to an event and a follower sees it 1) Since it's easier, the follower didn't need any interest it just popped up in their feed and they decided to go for validation

2) There are 2 phone drones at an event, repeat for everyone that does this now you are at a packed event with people that don't care, locking out the people that do.

Because of network effects, more users is generally more interesting. Blue Sky has "enough" at this point for me to be happy there. Programmers like antirez, my bike racing people like inrng, my city's mayor and one of our city councilors, and also a bunch of urbanists.

Edit: you lose some connections moving around, but I've also had friends I've known since the days of IRC. I think I'm mostly resigned to picking whatever works best in the moment and being willing to move (like abandoning Twitter) when it's not working.

https://atmosphereconf.org/?ref=verdverm.hn

Paul Frazee’s decision to archive the Beaker Browser project in December 2022 and shift focus from the Dat protocol (now evolved as Hypercore) to the development of the AT Protocol indeed represents a significant pivot in his career. Many observers in the decentralized-web community, including yourself, continue to regard the pure peer-to-peer architecture of Dat and Beaker as an elegant and philosophically pure approach to user-controlled data and hosting. It is understandable to view this transition as a regrettable departure from what appeared, at the time, to be the most coherent solution.

To provide context grounded in Frazee’s own documented reflections, he invested several years (2016–2022) in Beaker as a peer-to-peer browser built atop Dat/Hypercore. The system enabled one-click website creation, forking of sites, and early experiments with social applications such as Rotonde and Fritter. However, in his official post-mortem on the Beaker archive notice, Frazee outlined the practical limitations that led to discontinuation. https://github.com/beakerbrowser/beaker/blob/master/archive-...

He explicitly noted that the project “never solved the hard problems” required for broad adoption, particularly for dynamic social networking. In a more detailed 2024 essay titled “Why isn’t Bluesky a peer-to-peer network?,” Frazee elaborated on the specific shortcomings of pure peer-to-peer models when applied to large-scale social systems.

He concluded that insisting on a fully device-hosted peer-to-peer network for a mainstream social platform “would’ve been a mistake,” given users’ unwillingness to sacrifice features or reliability for theoretical decentralization benefits.

The AT Protocol, which Frazee helped architect as Bluesky’s CTO (a role he continues to hold as of early 2026), represents a deliberate hybrid synthesis rather than an abandonment of prior principles. It retains core peer-to-peer innovations—cryptographically signed user data repositories, hosting agility, Merkle-tree-based verification, and portable identities—while delegating aggregation, indexing, and high-scale delivery to dedicated infrastructure (Personal Data Servers, relays, and AppViews).

This design enables the data sovereignty and forkability that Dat/Beaker championed, while delivering the performance, discoverability, and moderation capabilities necessary for widespread use. The ongoing FreeSky initiative, discussed in our prior exchange, further advances this by providing independent Personal Data Servers and relays, reducing reliance on Bluesky-operated infrastructure and realizing more of the original portability vision.

The Dat/Hypercore protocol itself was not discontinued; it continues under the Holepunchto organization and powers other applications. Thus, the technical lineage persists in parallel. In technology development, particularly within decentralized systems, iterative refinement based on empirical constraints is common. Frazee has publicly framed the transition as an application of lessons from multiple prior projects (including Secure Scuttlebutt and CTZN) rather than a repudiation.

Whether one regards the shift as a misstep or a pragmatic evolution depends on the relative weighting of ideological purity versus practical adoption and usability at scale. Bluesky’s growth to millions of users and the expanding AT Protocol ecosystem suggest the hybrid model has achieved broader traction than pure peer-to-peer social experiments previously attained.

In summary, FreeSky embodies the practical "alternative" envisioned in early AT Protocol discussions—offering decentralized hosting and tools within the Bluesky-compatible network rather than a separate platform. For those interested in trying it, start by exploring custom handles through freesky.social or reviewing the dashboard for operational insights. Additional details are available via Project Liberty announcements and AT Protocol documentation at atproto.com

As others have said, the data has to be publishable to be useful. We do have data export laws. The format is known to be ready to use interoperably, not some private schema--atop the PBC commitment, which will at least have moderate legal costs if not a guarantee. It has unequivocally set a new high bar.

They seem pretty locked in to doing what they committed to. The day may come when they turn. It may come first by friction, but the turn has to be pretty complete, because the data is pretty open. What's needed to view it, use it at all, is pretty close to what's needed to host it.

"The site whose value prop is sharing your posts and data with other apps may stop sharing your posts and data with other apps." Yeah, it's possible. It's also possible they just close.

Several people have mentioned that "you can just own your own data, so that's enough, right?"

Interoperating with Bluesky requires you to either 1) opt into the did:plc standard, which is a centrally controlled certificate transparency log, or 2) have all your users create did:web accounts by manually setting DNS records.

So it is not possible to build on Bluesky at all without opting into this centrally controlled layer. This original post covers this, but maybe not in enough detail to stop commenters from missing the point.

Bluesky the company controls 95%+ of PDSes in the system, which control users' private keys, and they're extending PDSes to include more functionality that prevents users from easily exiting the network, e.g. private data is being implemented in a way where Bluesky LLC can see all your activity. The protocol changes often and with limited community input.

This is being done because "there are no other ways to do it" and "our users are okay with it". The community does pretty consistently attack people who dissent (e.g. look at what happened when Mastodon leaders objected). There's a lot of cheerleading for people who do opt into the system, and there's really no incentive for informed criticisms.

It's not really decentralized or neutral infrastructure; it's a great network for a number of specific subcultures who have a nice space away from X, and I hope the team embraces that.

Wizards can be difficult to develop and maintain. Writing a working, useful, functional, robust, informative, environment-agnostic, and re-entrant script (or GUI/TUI) can take scads of effort. Now that LLMs abound, much of that grind is quickly solved. For example, here's a vibe-coded script that to get dovecot, postfix, and virtual users set up on my new server with mailboxes copied from an old server:

https://autonoma.ca/mail-setup.txt

To vibe code it, the prompt included content from:

https://xtreamsolution.net/complete-email-server-setup-tutor...

After a few kicks at the can (run script, capture errors, feed errors to LLM, repeat), it finally configured a working system. Reviewing the script, yes, it's beyond painful. It doesn't have to be, though; the authors of complex software could produce similar guided installers.