Comment on Bluesky has started honoring takedown requests from Turkish government
Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 2 days agoSo the decentralized version makes sense to me. The blue sky model you describe sounds like just farming out the server load. What am I missing?
That there are actually multiple relays. There’s no hard coded single relay, that would be ridiculous.
There is a hard coded relay in the official bluesky app, just like it has a hard coded moderation service. But both of those are changeable with third party appviews/clients
I was oversimplifying a bit such that it wouldn’t be overwhelming to a self-described uninformed person asking for an explanation.
Yes, there are multiple actual relays but they functionally constitute a single layer or class of components in a birds eye view of the whole system.
As far as I am aware, no one other than BlueSky runs the relays, or has the code to do so.
If I am wrong about that, I would appreciate a source indicating such.
Does anyone other than BlueSky actually run a relay?
Several people have self hosted relays. Afaik nothing that anyone has used in “production”, everyone just uses the default one. I expect that will change as people figure it out, and trust in bsky pbc drops.
Example of self hosting bsky.app/profile/why.bsky.team/…/3lkwg2djrfk23
The code to run a relay is here github.com/bluesky-social/indigo
Your “example of self hosting” is not an example of self hosting the relay, just an appview which is still being fully dependent of other Bluesky services like the relay. It’s pretty unlikely that the relay would be at all practical to host on a RPi5. But even if it was the problem still remains that the network is set up in a way where self-hosting it only results in you creating your own separate bubble, not meaningfully participating in the official one.
I also doubt anyone has selfhosted relays long-term since right now there’s very little purpose to that and the resource requirements are massive as well as keep growing at a fast pace in terms of the disk space required.
… Yeah, as 73ms already pointed out… that first link is just someone setting up an AppView.
To truly run an independent BlueSky system… you would have to run your own PDS, your own Relay, and your own AppView.
Your second link does actually have code and a rough setup guide to running your own Relay, so I will give you thanks and credit for showing that at least it is possible to theoretically do this…
But you say ‘several people run their own Relays’ and then do not evidence that.
The Relay config here is just… how to host your own Relay that would act as a member of BlueSky’s Relay network.
Basically, that is just how to transfer some of BlueSky’s server hosting costs … to yourself.
If you set up a totally independent Relay… could it even interface with BlueSky’s Relays?
As far as I can tell: No.
It would be totally independent… a parellel network, not a federated one that interfaces with the rest of BlueSky, and is thus not actually able to ‘federate’.
What… you would have to do… is set up your own Relay, connect it to basically all the other preexisting PDSs you want to include, then also run your own PDS, then also run your own AppView, and connect it to your own Relay… or just trust someother person running their own AppView, or just trust the official ones.
(But… I think that to connect your own Relay to preexisting PDSs… that would require those PDSs to… disconnect from the mainline BlueSky Relay system… so that’s kind of a problem.)
That would be the only way to make your own … sort of branch of the BlueSky system, that at least in theory might be resistant to centralized censorship from BlueSky.
And again… I am not aware of anyone who has yet done this, or if it would even work at a technical level.
When dealing with software and tech companies, a good rule of thumb is that a planned or possible feature… doesn’t actually exist untill its been provably demonstrated to exist and work.
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days ago
That is literally how I read it as well, BlueSky is farming out server load to enthusiastic and dedicated users, while also just going ham on the PR / propoganda / marketing making themselves appear to be something they are not.
Unless I missed something and BlueSky is actually letting people run and custom configure their own relays at least semi independently… yeah, they’re basically being quite shady and misleading.
LeninsOvaries@lemmy.cafe 2 days ago
People are allowed to run their own relays, but it’s really expensive and nobody wants to.
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days ago
Really?
Like, this is genuine news to me, if its true.
github.com/itaru2622/bluesky-selfhost-env
I can find tools like this, that help you set up a good number of elements of BlueSky… but the only mention of the relay (apparently also known as BGS, for… BigSky?)… is that you connect to it… not run your own.
Beyond even the price point and required server hosting heft… where, where is an actual ‘here is how to download, configure and run your own BlueSky relay’?
As far as I am aware, all there has been is a mix of vague, noncommital, and hopeful musings of various people suggesting that one day maybe it will be possible to do this, hopefully they’ll support that soon…
… which to me at least, very much reminds me of fanboys/girls of a video game just coping with the fact that their favorite video game with a massive bug or lacking a major advertised feature… will just have it fixed one day… even though the devs have been radio silent about it for a year.
merdaverse@lemmy.world 2 days ago
For relays yes, but for PDS that’s not at all true. The PDS architecture lets you own your data and migrate it away from Bluesky servers or even from the BS apps, when/if they will be available. Something that ActivityPub severely lacks. Try to migrate your account from one Lemmy instance to another.
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days ago
Yes, you can host your own PDS server, that is known and stated.
The entire design of a lemmy instance is meant to be more ‘self contained’, as I already mentioned. This is what enables the federation network to organize in a ‘many to many’ connection style, as opposed to a ‘many to one’.
A lemmy instance roughly has many/most of the capabilities of a PDS, Relay, and AppView… all rolled into one.
This is a fundamental difference of a ‘true’ federation model… all the members of the federation are capable of operating independently.
If you are in a federation of unequals, with built in dependencies… your ‘federation’ is much more like a king with vassal states, not a voluntary association.
Yes, migration of a user account from one instance to another would be complicated… but … so would migrating a user from one PDS to another.
I don’t even know how you could fully ‘migrate away from BlueSky servers’… when BlueSky run the only Relays.
Also, many (most?) actual client apps for viewing lemmy, posting on it, etc… they pretty much hold a lot of your particular user customizations, at least as it comes to visual theming, independently, locally, not even related to the actual user account on an instance you are using.
They also support easy switching between different lemmy user/instance accounts…
…
Also also, as far as I am aware… if you have an account on a lemmy instance, you can delete your account and this will wipe out all of that account’s posts and comments across the whole fediverse, aside from modlogs and internet archive web snapshotting type stuff.
I … think you can also export your own data as well?
Not 100% sure on these last two parts, maybe an instance admin or powermod could chime in… but I think this is correct?
merdaverse@lemmy.world 2 days ago
They are fundamentally different, the whole ActivityPub federation vs ATProtocol decentralization has been talked to death in technical detail.
Not true. Bluesky has PDS migration in its design. In ActivityPub it is simply not possible