Hi everyone.
I’m new to these kinds of innovative platforms, and I’ve come across Mastodon and Bluesky in particular. I’ve realized that both use different but equally free and open-source protocols, so my question is: are there any substantial differences between the two social networks? Should I choose one over the other?
Thanks for your replies, and have a great day.
Bluesky is private, Mastodon is FOSS. Both are federated.
Bluesky is sort of federated while having a centralized content moderation. Saying it is federated is basically like saying a napkin can be used as trousers. It will cover some parts, but isn’t the real deal.
The substantial difference is that mastodon is really federated, and decentralized, thereby moderated at different instances and levels (by server federation and defederation as well as local moderation). Also, really important, there is no algorithm feeding you content a platform owner considers worth emphasizing.
Fair point, but I do think this is a necessary consequence of Bluesky being private. The major differences between the two platforms stem from private vs. FOSS.
Both issues are tightly coupled. There is no business model/value in a truly federated platform that doesn’t rely on algorithms. Try to sell ads to your customers, they will always prefer other platforms with proper targeting.
So why would a private company use a protocol and architecture, that cannot be monetized properly?
I agree, when I say it’s necessary I mean the fact that it’s private compels it to act that way. I’m pro-FOSS.
I’m also pro-FOSS and pro-don’t-your-dare-manipulating-my-social-media-for-commercial-or-political-reasons :-)
Catchy, I know.
Yep this is the only difference. Bluesky is promoted by the business owners, so it will have more activity and probably more consistent development and support. At the same time, it is a business and enshittification axioms still apply.
Yep, Mastodon is better as a consequence