Jack Dorsey skipped ActivityPub, built AtProto, lost Twitter, funded Bluesky, watched it become a company with VCs and a board, said it was "repeating all the mistakes," left, and now funds Nostr.

@mackuba @baralheia @mastodonmigration neat. We just added a proper section on Relays to the new AT Protocol website (see my post on Bluesky about it) and we included an abbreviated list there.

@sheislaurence @evan @boris @reflex @dansup @quillmatiq

the strategy seems pretty clear based on how the protocol works and VC strategies we've seen before. survive and grow via VC until AT is accepted as the open social protocol. till everybody thinks that's the one to build on. have bluesky be to AT what google is to HTTP. an open protocol wasn't enough then either.

I will complain until I see their "unfair" advantage (imo) end and we know how they plan to provide an ROI to their investors.

@wjmaggos @sheislaurence @evan @boris @dansup @quillmatiq That last part especially, they won't even say who their investors are at this point.

@reflex @wjmaggos @sheislaurence @dansup @quillmatiq I don't think that's true. They're on CrunchBase.

https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/bluesky-514d

@evan please remove me from replies, William Maggos is a troll who spreads misinfo & is generally unkind who I have long blocked (yes I understand you’re pushing back against his misinfo)

(These thread canoes with a general tendency to not trim reply mentions in many clients is not great)

@evan @wjmaggos @sheislaurence @boris @dansup @quillmatiq Does it have the results of the latest funding round last year because they've been silent about that? People keep asking and getting no answers. I can't see the funding data on CrunchBase, perhaps you can?

https://www.businessinsider.com/x-competitor-bluesky-valuation-new-funding-round-2025-1?op=1

@evan @reflex @wjmaggos @sheislaurence @dansup @quillmatiq

Evan, it is not at all clear who owns Bluesky, or even how much money they have raised and from whom.

More about the mystery here...

https://mastodon.online/@mastodonmigration/116025246450023071

@mastodonmigration thanks! I had heard there was another round in the works, but I didn't know the details. I appreciate the detective work.

@mastodonmigration @evan @reflex @wjmaggos @dansup @quillmatiq it's interesting that the #transparency report #Bluesky posted less than a month ago doesn't mention anything about investors. Having personally worked in the transparency sector, it is the first time I see a company suggest the word doesn't relate to financial transparency 🫣. https://bsky.social/about/blog/01-29-2026-transparency-report-2025

@rakoo @ricci AP as implemented places you on a server which is your identity, that server is a specific vertical of a online social presence (microblogging, images, videos, short videos, articles, forums, link aggregator)

The AP C2S model separates to a degree the identity from the application. You do still only have one social graph and inbox/outbox, so it's not ideal, most people have different social groups on different verticals of platforms.

But as long as AP is deployed in the topology and systems it is today, it does not do the "thing" that people do socially.

Mastodon doesn't give you a "community" just because you're on the same server (no local only posting, local feed is too noisy on larger servers), Loops arguably removes all local community thanks to algorithmic feed – I don't think they've a local feed that I've seen in press.

AT Protocol makes getting into social spaces in different verticals easy. Conceptually AP C2S is very similar: you have a place that is your identity + data, and then you join places with that identity (maybe customising the identity or social graph for that vertical application)

@rakoo @ricci have a read of Lauren's article: https://connectedplaces.online/where-does-community-live/

Yes, community on AT Protocol is a nascent concept still, but the separation of identity + data from applications makes it possible to experiment and have one social graph or many.

One project doing community spaces on AT Protocol is: https://github.com/collectivesocial/open-social

@rakoo @baralheia @thisismissem @mastodonmigration @cwebber

Yeah great question! It's that everything past the local level is flat from a network/protocol level - all communities are 'equidistant' at the network layer, which isn't how it works for human communication and society.

So I'm agreeing with your point about circles of trust, but down a layer at the protocol - and I don't think it's an accident that Mastodon and other fedi software have not really gone very far in implementing such things given that - while it's certainly possible - it's not inherent in AP.

But yeah I think AP is far *closer* to how humans actually communicate than atproto

@rakoo @ricci @thisismissem this makes the most sense to me. I think "we" on the AP have a hard time with this because we alternate between servers describing themselves as neutral providers a la email or already being community focused (like the Indieweb server I'm on).

PS by the Threadiverse do you mean Threads and some other assortment of apps?

I think the way Laurens described reddit as

@rakoo@blah.rako.space completely right.

The "community" aspect on microblog UI is shallow at best. Instance names and domains are signalling community, but you're still screaming into a public town square about anything and everything.

Threadiverse absolutely does it better, but the crossover between it and the wider fediverse is minimal at best (I am posting on NodeBB right now.)

I'm going to be talking about this next week at FediMTL!

https://fedimtl.ca

cc @thisismissem@hachyderm.io @mcneely@indieweb.social

@julian @rakoo @thisismissem I think it would be great to hear about how the experience could potentially be improved for communities. The local timeline exists but it certainly isn't prominently featured.

@rakoo @ricci @thisismissem thanks!

Even then, the local timeline is more of a "catch-all" bucket for discussing anything, not really topic-focused.

Which isn't wrong, per se, just a different way of presenting content, one that loses a lot of context (context collapse, one could call it <img class="not-responsive emoji" src="https://activitypub.space/assets/plugins/nodebb-plugin-emoji/emoji/android/1f60f.png?v=f7cc58fdd6b" title="" /> )

@mcneely@indieweb.social @rakoo@blah.rako.space

@rakoo @thisismissem

I think it's nuts that Masto doesn't have local-only posts, it would be the easiest thing in the world to do, it's entirely natural to the underlying data model. Good on blacksky for building it first.

Re: @thisismissem 's point AP not directly matching how communities form, this is the kind of thing I had in mind when I said that neither AP nor activitypub is directly modeling human interaction. But AP is closer because there are large chunks of the fediverse where it does actually fit community. The instance I'm on is one such example, the local feed is heavily slanted towards people who have interests related to me, we moderate based on our own community standards, and all that. Many of the people I interact with are on similarly-sized instances that have their own noticeable community.

@ricci @rakoo are you abbreviating AP as AT Protocol? Because AP is how I (and many others) write ActivityPub — AT Protocol is ATP or sometimes AT (the IETF WG is ATP)

@rakoo @ricci now that Gargron is out of the way, I really hope @mellifluousbox and @renchap bring local-only posts to mainline Mastodon. It'd be such a huge help to moderators & server admins, it's not funny, and that's before you even get to the needs of server-local communities that you *don't* want federating.

Also, custom collections support to support addressing for Groups would be fantastic. I know Jesse from Frequency already has an implementation of that on top of a mastodon codebase