Hat durchaus noch Probleme, aber prinzipiell funktioniert es und das ist natürlich richtig cool. Gibt schon Accounts da drüben, denen ich gerne von hier folgen würde. Meiner ist schon verbunden: @fingolas.bsky.social@bsky.brid.gy
It's now possible to connect #Bluesky and #Fediverse accounts together, and talk across a bridge! We get into the nuts and bolts of how it works, and what you can do to get started! #BridgyFed
Talk about decentralization: I'm quote-boosting a skeet from Bluesky's CEO that federated via #BridgyFed talking about an article where Jack Dorsey talked about #BlueSky and #Nostr. 😱
(It's not peak decentralization yet because not bridging my posts back to Bluesky. If you want to do that, here are the instructions to opt in to Bridgy Fed. On the other hand, if you don't want to see any posts that originated on Bluesky, I'm pretty sure you can just block the domain bsky.brid.gy.)
But if #BridgyFed becomes more user-friendly, that will be a big step towards interoperability. And we can finally put this silly competition between #ActivityPub and #ATProtocol to rest.
I found it confusing. For one thing, it asks me for my Mastodon account. Though Akkoma uses Mastodon’s API, not all sites recognize this nor support it—I don’t know if BridgyFed would reject.
Secondly, it’s not clear how to opt in. I think I opted in but there was nothing to say “Congrats! People from #Bluesky can see you!”
Also, how do I receive #Bluesky posts? That’s not apparent to me.
BridgyFed for the Fediverse should post as threads if the post exceeds 300 characters. Now it just truncates 500 char posts and people have no idea about the rest of it without any link or context. I know it’s early, but this would be great. @snarfed.org@snarfed.org
If you aren't aware, the BlueSky-Fediverse bridge known as BridgyFed is live now.
Back when it was announced, there was a small window of time when it was added to the Oliphant's Tier 0 blocklist.
If you are using this blocklist and WANT to be federated with BlueSky, please double check to make sure you don't have the version of the list that it appears on. You may have blocked the bridge and not even know it.
The domain you want to look for is: brid.gy
Please boost for reach, so your admin knows of this possible issue. Thanks. 🙏
Slowly, but surely my Mastodon posts (this one included) are showing up on Bluesky. Bridgy.fed kicks in. Thanks to @snarfed.org@snarfed.org for all the hard work.
Wow! All my Bluesky posts are backfilling now into my instance! That's cool! I'd guess this "feature" isn't available for the BlueSky side of things....🤔
If anyone notices posts on my profile from older than today, please reply to this and let me know! If you're on BlueSky, you need to follow @ap.brid.gy before you reply or I won't see it here. (This post is federating to BlueSky through a Fediverse-BlueSky bridge)
When he built a bridge to connect Bluesky to Mastodon and other ActivityPub-powered platforms, @snarfed.org@snarfed.org started a new chapter for the fediverse. The software engineer opens up to @mike about his rollercoaster ride in the latest episode of Dot Social:
Serious question for those that this is relevant to: if you don't understand how ActivityPub works, even a little bit, why do you feel the need to have opinions on how it should work?
Isn't this backwards as hell? Shouldn't you try to understand how something works, then ask why it is that way and if it's intentional?
Too many people here have this strange opinion that they have some sort of privacy, even if their profile/posts are set to "public".
This is just simply not true. We're on the internet. There's over 20,000 Fedi instances and there's just no way to manually parse them to make sure there's no "bad actors" using your "public" posts for whatever the hell they want.
We already see this happening with things like NewsMast which is aiming to be a "news" app where their users don't have to login or register to a Fediverse server, yet they will see posts by Fediverse users from bigger instances based on "categories".
Maybe do some research about how the protocol works and how it's VERY opt-out to the core, before you have opinions on it. Just saying....
All I care about is being able to follow the people I want to follow, from a single account, regardless of whether they're on the #Fediverse or #Threads or #BlueSky or #Nostr or whatever.
I really don't care who does or does not get to see my public posts. The whole point of a public post is that it's (wait for it) PUBLIC. By definition, I want it to be seen by as many people as possible.
If I don't want a post to be public, I'll mark it unlisted or followers-only, or I'll send it as a DM (yes, I know DMs on Mastodon aren't encrypted at rest. That is unfortunate).
There is zero expectation of privacy for posts you make public. Never has been. On any network.
If #BridgyFed comes online, I want all my public posts to be seen by people on #Bluesky and #Nostr and wherever else BF decides to bridge to. And I want people on all those platforms to be able to find and follow me. And I don't want to have to do anything special to make that happen.
But now because of a few irate paranoid people who happened to have a problem with the author's use of the phrase "opt out" (the entire Fediverse is opt-out by default, don't you know), that's probably never going to happen. Now, if I understand correctly, I'll have to explicitly opt-in to be discoverable by BlueSky users, but what's worse, BlueSky users who want me to be able to find them from my Fediverse account have to explicitly opt in too.
Which is a total joke. Most of them don't even know the Fediverse exists, have no knowledge or understanding of this bridge, and/or have no interest in the Fediverse. Or they would've joined the Fediverse-proper by now.
In fact, one of the hopes was that when BS users start getting followed by Fediverse users, they'll see our weird handles, wonder what it's all about, do some research, and maybe by virtue of that, will end up joining us "for realsies":..
So how many BS users do you think are going to opt-in to be discoverable from the Fediverse? Especially the high-profile accounts, the accounts I was most looking forward to being able to follow and interact with?
Our statement of support as a server with the #BlueSkyBridge effort of @snarfed.org@snarfed.org
As with Threads federation, I think it is fine that different servers and users take different views - that is feature not a bug of the fedi - but wanted to be very clear with our servers position here and the thinking behind it.
I’m not even arguing any more about which social media platform is the best. Only thing certain is that X is shit. For the rest I’m just waiting for the modern microblogging services to be connected via AvtivityPub. In the meantime I’m using only Mastodon and Threads.
I’m still undecided on making a #bluesky account but I sure as hell don’t want to create a #threads account. A lot of my favorite voices went to bluesky and I honestly kinda miss them. @parkermolloy@owillis@nikkimcr
I'm considering writing a formal document (FEP?) that specifies how an ActivityPub service (including both server and client behavior) may implement domain-only names like #Bluesky has. Because it's the biggest beneficial thing Bluesky has that we don't (the one other thing is detached "preferred" handles, which is related). I've reasoned somewhere else before that it would be super helpful for #BridgyFed, #Tumblr, and #Wordpress.