I's heard news that BlueSky has been growing a lot as Xitter becomes worse and worse, but why do people seem to prefer BlueSky? This confuses me because BlueSky does not have any federalization technologies built into it, meaning it's just another centralized platform, and thus vulnerable to the same things that make modern social media so horrible.
And so, in the hopes of having a better understanding, I've come here to ask what problems Mastodon has that keep people from migrating to it and what is BlueSky doing so right that it attracts so many people.
This question is directed to those who have used all three platforms, although others are free to put out their own thoughts.
(To be clear, I've never used Xitter, BlueSky or Mastodon. I'm asking specifically so that I don't have to make an account on each to find out by myself.)
Edit:
Edit2: (changed the wording a bit on the last part of point 1 to make my point clearer.)
From reading the comments, here are what seems to be the main reasons:
- Federation is hard
The concept of federation seems to be harder to grasp than tech people expected. As one user pointed out, tech literacy is much less prevalent than tech folk might expect.
On Mastodon, you must pick an instance, for some weird "federation" tech reason, whatever that means; and thanks to that "federation" there are some post you cannot see (due to defederalization). To someone who barely understands what a server is, the complex network of federalization is to much to bare.
BlueSky, on the other hand, is simple: just go to this website, creating an account and Ta Da! Done! No need to understand anything else.
~~The federalized nature of Mastodon seems to be its biggest flaw.~~
The unfamiliar and more complex nature of Mastodon's federalization technology seems to be its biggest obstacle towards achieving mass adoption.
- No Algorithm
Mastodon has no algorithm to surface relevant posts, it is just a chronological timeline. Although some prefer this, others don't and would rather have an algorithm serving them good quality post instead of spending 10h+ curating a subscription feed.
- UI and UX
People say that Mastodon (and Lemmy) have HORRIBLE UX, which will surely drive many away from Mastodon. Also, some pointed out that BlueSky's overall design more closely follows that of Twitter, so BlueSky quite literally looks more like pre-Musk Xitter.
I'm on both Mastodon and Bluesky. To me, Mastodon's biggest problem is its refusal to have an algorithm to surface popular content. Yes there are problems with algorithms, but I don't have the time or inclination to read every post in chronological order. A good algorithm would show me popular posts without manipulating me for profit.
Edt: a few people have misunderstood me. I'm not proposing "Mastodon shows me stuff from people I don't follow," I'm suggesting "Mastodon shows me stuff only from people I follow, but it shows me the popular stuff first."
Problem with algorithms showing popular content is that once you have them, you'll have people trying to use them to make money. And by extension people trying to manipulate you for profit. Doesn't have to be the platform itself doing it for it to be harmful.
Yeah being manipulated by algorithm is a problem. The best solution I can think of is Mastodon adding the ability to choose your algorithm. Not just a list of approved ones since the admins could manipulate that list, but the ability to actually upload some code so you can either write your own algorithm or choose one written by someone you trust.
That comes with a lot of problems like potentially overworking the server so I don't know if it's actually a viable solution but it would be nice.
As a layman, I promise you “write your own algorithmic code” is not a feature that would compel me to sign up for a service
I was thinking along the lines of being given a list of popular algorithms, but if you find an algorithm you like on another instance you can copy it over to your instance. So it is not necessary to write code and nearly nobody would do it, they would just use ones that other people created.
But I realize this is an extremely difficult request so I'm not really serious when I propose it.
I think it would be an awesome feature but like you said, just not something that is going to sway a typical social media user to give it a shot. But I can see it being a really cool way for advanced users to really customize their experience.
Oh yeah this has little to do with the original question about why bsky is more popular. This suggestion of "let people write their own algorithms" is for the devs who think algorithms are harmful. They aren't harmful if you give users the power to choose their own algorithm. Techie people can write the algorithms and non-techie people can choose them. Chances are a few algorithms would eventually become the most popular and very few would be written after that, but the point is you let the users decide instead of the Mastodon devs having to write the algorithms.
And now I realize bsky actually has something like this: Custom Feeds. If I understand correctly, they get around the "running untrusted code" issue by not running the code on bsky servers. Instead whoever wrote the custom feed gets the data from bsky, runs the algorithm on a separate server, then returns the custom feed. Pretty clever. https://docs.bsky.app/docs/starter-templates/custom-feeds
Of course, but good luck getting those 5% of users that actually produce nearly 100% of the content to move over if their business model cannot work. And once those move, you know where all the people following them move.
I don't really think mastodon needs those 5% to produce content to entertain and advertise a userbase of 95% lurkers. For me it's definitely a bonus that they're not there - I don't need influencer-shit in my feed.
If that kind of content creator and passive user goes to Bluesky that's fine. If they went to mastodon we'd just see calls for an algorithm, which would be directly against what I want in the platform.
I'm inclined to agree that's a problem. Everyone's first encounter with a social media content recommendation algorithm was one designed to manipulate them into clicking ads, so it caused some backlash. Recommendation algorithms can be tuned to show things people care about and want to engage with.
Exactly, a lot of algorithms on for-profit sites are manipulative trash but refusing to have any algorithm at all is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Exactly I had difficulty finding content and any "guide" or anything I seemed to find was too confusing or not practical for me. I don't use Twitter, blue sky, or mastadon regularly but when I checked them all out, blue sky was the best in all round; "Ease of use" and "easy to find content"
That sounds more like a feature than a bug. I remember when Twitter was actually useful. You could sort by "new" as the default and your feed only included stuff from people you followed. And then it went to complete shit with the sort defaulting to "fuck your preferences", sponsored content and your feed being littered with click bait, paid content and all the other bits of enshitification. And that is all built on the algorithmic selection of content.
I didn't say it was a bad thing, I just said it's one reason Bsky is more popular. People are busy and want algorithms.
Isn't Explore - Posts on the desktop web client exactly what you're looking for? It was always there and it's where I spend most of my Mastodon time.
It looks like that's popular posts by anyone, not just by people I follow. So it's a start, but different people want to see different things so having a single firehose like Explore doesn't really meet the need. For me, I want to see popular stuff by people or hashtags I follow. Other people might want to see other things.
Yes, that's true. I am under the impression that "the algorithm" on the popular platforms mixes in posts from people you don't follow. The only one I was somewhat familiar with was the Twitter one from when I was there.
There’s a trending posts list which helps fill this want for me.
thats the entire point of mastodon.
literally why it was built. Edit :
It’s not supposed to be a place you go to get served content. You pick who you follow, and that’s your feed.
The problem has been lack of adoption by popular news and culture . So you go there, and you cannot easily find high volume content provided like the bbc, nfl, Real Madrid, Activision, etc etc
We get that it is the design philosophy for Mastodon to not have an algorithm serving content, but it appears to be a non-starter for a lot of users of Twitter like services.
In theory, a third party could write that algorithm and implement it in some form. Truth Social functions like that, but without federating to the rest of Mastodon.
I think people are misunderstanding what I mean by algorithm. An algorithm could show you stuff from people you don't follow (yuck), but it could also show you popular stuff only from people you follow. That used to be how Facebook did it.
This is a great commentary to me. I think it shows just how much of an appetite we currently have for a curated space. It’s almost like Mastodon is a service that’s about 15 years too late.
I remember going around to older forums and sites looking for specific content when I wanted it, and I wasn’t always guaranteed to find something I liked, but I would often see something interesting.
Now, though, I really want anywhere I go to knock me off my feet with good content because that’s what I’m conditioned to. Isn’t that what makes me an addict, though? I’m wondering if that chance of dissatisfaction isn’t a virtue to ensure no one platform takes control of all my attention.
The lack of an algorithm is a solution. Social media tends to be too addictive to the point it can be harmful to humans, so Mastodon was intentionally designed to be less addictive.
I didn't say refusing to have an algorithm was a bad thing, I just said it's one reason Bluesky is more popular.
Algorithms makes me less addictive because it always suggest the same type of boring content
Oh, that’s interesting. Lucky you, I guess. The algorithms have been tuned to be as engaging as possible, and that seems to be working for most people. Obviously, it’s impossible to make it work for literally everyone, and you seem to be one of the few who can escape the algorithm.
I think using hashtags with filters serve the same purpose
But it still won't put my friend's popular posts at the top, right? I don't want to scroll past 20 pictures of people's dinner and then find out one of my friends got engaged, I want the "I got engaged" post at the top because it's probably getting the most interaction.