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.
-
@cy @mastodonmigration @baralheia did:webvh is also a blockchain then.
Basically you need to have the full did history for a bunch of purposes for like trusting a full DID document from its creation to current state.
I just sign the most current document with a digital signature, and don't bother with links to previous documents. You need the same key you had during creation to add records to your blockchain, so just use that key to sign the records and drop the blockchain. I say, at least.
Otherwise you end up with monstrous amounts of data required just to prove your most recent record is legit.
CC: @mastodonmigration@mastodon.online @baralheia@dragonchat.org -
I just sign the most current document with a digital signature, and don't bother with links to previous documents. You need the same key you had during creation to add records to your blockchain, so just use that key to sign the records and drop the blockchain. I say, at least.
Otherwise you end up with monstrous amounts of data required just to prove your most recent record is legit.
CC: @mastodonmigration@mastodon.online @baralheia@dragonchat.org@cy @mastodonmigration @baralheia nope, you just need a previously signed key, e.g., the rotation key.
But if you want to prove the lineage of a given DID you do need that full history. Hence did:webvh (full history) vs did:web (current snapshot)
did:plc decided that they wanted to retain the full history but typically only surface the current snapshot.
-
@cy @mastodonmigration @baralheia nope, you just need a previously signed key, e.g., the rotation key.
But if you want to prove the lineage of a given DID you do need that full history. Hence did:webvh (full history) vs did:web (current snapshot)
did:plc decided that they wanted to retain the full history but typically only surface the current snapshot.
Rotation key isn't going to prove anything, since the content of the ID is the creation record. It won't match anything else other than the first record.
If (on the other hand) the content of the ID is the public key fingerprint, then it's already proven.
CC: @mastodonmigration@mastodon.online @baralheia@dragonchat.org -
@evan @quillmatiq @dansup the problem is, and always has been, that we keep fighting between the protocols and slinging mud, such that it deters collaboration.
That's why I wrote that damn letter back in September last year. The more this carries on, the more it hurts us all.
In case you need a refresher: https://writings.thisismissem.social/statement-on-discourse-about-activitypub-and-at-protocol/
That actively had people on both sides going "hell yeah, let's work together" and a small group of people decided they didn't like that. Think about how that impacted developer relations. Think about how that harmed collaborations.
Think about the ideas that could have been cross-pollinated and instead we lost them for ActivityPub and for AT Protocol. (though, tbh, I think it's mainly ActivityPub that lost out here, because AT Protocol is so much further ahead in splitting data from applications)
Also, fwiw, Mastodon has had huge investors to keep it alive at times. That €1 Million euros that Eugen was paid didn't come from the community supporting the project on Patreon. That came from one or a few large funders (investors).
@thisismissem donors, not investors.
@evan @quillmatiq @dansup -
@dansup I don’t understand why people here feel the need to diminish others’ work to boost their own. ActivityPub is great, but it still lacks things that AT Protocol is actively solving. Dorsey isn’t working on AT Protocol anymore, you already pointed that out. Instead of burning bridges, let’s build them and aim for a more connected ecosystem. If you spend 5 minutes reading what the people over there are saying and their roadmap you would realize they are an ally rather than an enemy!
-
@stefan it comes from @laurenshof.
@thisismissem @stefan
id estimate it at 12M MAU, probably a bit higher (this is dependent on the ratio you take for users participate versus lurkers, this estimates that this ratio is the same for DAU as it is for MAU. but likely that this ratio is higher for MAU than for DAU)
https://bsky.app/profile/laurenshof.online/post/3mdisqjlb5s2i -
@thisismissem @stefan
id estimate it at 12M MAU, probably a bit higher (this is dependent on the ratio you take for users participate versus lurkers, this estimates that this ratio is the same for DAU as it is for MAU. but likely that this ratio is higher for MAU than for DAU)
https://bsky.app/profile/laurenshof.online/post/3mdisqjlb5s2i@thisismissem @stefan the reason for doing this multiplier is not so much for getting MAU right in absolute terms, but because mastodon/fedi MAU data also includes lurkers in their data. So you need it to get a fair comparison between fedi and the atmosphere
-
@thisismissem donors, not investors.
@evan @quillmatiq @dansup@renchap @evan @quillmatiq @dansup rich people who believe in the vision and want to see the future you're promising. They might not expect a 10x return, but let's not kid ourselves, they're putting in because there's something in it for them and they get a nice tax write-off.
If your donors stop donating because they no longer believe in the vision/team/etc, then that'll limit the project. You need these wealthy donors to stay happy, as much as Bluesky PBC needs their investors to stay happy.
Wealthy people with money to give/invest in support of a future you've sold them.
-
@renchap @evan @quillmatiq @dansup rich people who believe in the vision and want to see the future you're promising. They might not expect a 10x return, but let's not kid ourselves, they're putting in because there's something in it for them and they get a nice tax write-off.
If your donors stop donating because they no longer believe in the vision/team/etc, then that'll limit the project. You need these wealthy donors to stay happy, as much as Bluesky PBC needs their investors to stay happy.
Wealthy people with money to give/invest in support of a future you've sold them.
@renchap @evan @quillmatiq @dansup your roadmap is also largely determined by whatever you can get money for. The argument of investors in a PBC vs donors in a non-profit is silly because you're both taking money from extremely wealthy people to survive long enough to hopefully be sustainable without those big cash injections.
You've almost certainly had to make promises to donors to get them onboard.
It might not be a promise of a return, but wealthy people are still exerting some control on the project.
-
@renchap @evan @quillmatiq @dansup your roadmap is also largely determined by whatever you can get money for. The argument of investors in a PBC vs donors in a non-profit is silly because you're both taking money from extremely wealthy people to survive long enough to hopefully be sustainable without those big cash injections.
You've almost certainly had to make promises to donors to get them onboard.
It might not be a promise of a return, but wealthy people are still exerting some control on the project.
@thisismissem You are wrong here, those donations were not made in exchange of any specific features.
This is the case for grants where the money is in exchange of specific deliverables, but those donations were not grants.
-
@thisismissem You are wrong here, those donations were not made in exchange of any specific features.
This is the case for grants where the money is in exchange of specific deliverables, but those donations were not grants.
@renchap @evan @quillmatiq @dansup sure. I believe your 2024 annual report states that 1.5 million from Jeff Atwood was specifically for trying to restructure the projects organisation, that's a "feature" as big as any.
-
@renchap @evan @quillmatiq @dansup sure. I believe your 2024 annual report states that 1.5 million from Jeff Atwood was specifically for trying to restructure the projects organisation, that's a "feature" as big as any.
@thisismissem this is what went to Eugen + some legal fees around the complex legal restructuring that went alongside it.
-
@thisismissem this is what went to Eugen + some legal fees around the complex legal restructuring that went alongside it.
@renchap @evan @quillmatiq @dansup right, and that still served a purpose. It unblocked the organisation in order for the organisation to ship faster & to grow.
-
@thisismissem @stefan the reason for doing this multiplier is not so much for getting MAU right in absolute terms, but because mastodon/fedi MAU data also includes lurkers in their data. So you need it to get a fair comparison between fedi and the atmosphere
@laurenshof eh, you can certainly speculate but then maybe you need to start thinking of the fact that estimating fediverse MAU is far less exact and likely to underreport because you have to make decisions about querying tens of thousands of servers and a significant chunk don't even report active users. Do you also apply this there?
-
@laurenshof eh, you can certainly speculate but then maybe you need to start thinking of the fact that estimating fediverse MAU is far less exact and likely to underreport because you have to make decisions about querying tens of thousands of servers and a significant chunk don't even report active users. Do you also apply this there?
@ikuturso yeah, theres really only one server where them not reporting mau makes a meaningful difference, and thats misskey.social. i had a post from summer 2024 i think where i estimated them at 250k mau at that point based on total post count, but havent done the analysis since
-
@ikuturso yeah, theres really only one server where them not reporting mau makes a meaningful difference, and thats misskey.social. i had a post from summer 2024 i think where i estimated them at 250k mau at that point based on total post count, but havent done the analysis since
@laurenshof well that's the easy one to point to where it makes a huge difference but that doesn't mean the rest don't make a difference in aggregate.
There are also some large instances that are widely (but not universally) defederated and usually not counted in the stats you can get from places like fedidb. That's in addition to the ones they simply miss.
-
@laurenshof well that's the easy one to point to where it makes a huge difference but that doesn't mean the rest don't make a difference in aggregate.
There are also some large instances that are widely (but not universally) defederated and usually not counted in the stats you can get from places like fedidb. That's in addition to the ones they simply miss.
@ikuturso i run my own tracker set for this, which does include the Bad Places in the count. it does not make a meaningful difference in aggregate
-
@ikuturso i run my own tracker set for this, which does include the Bad Places in the count. it does not make a meaningful difference in aggregate
@laurenshof so do you have some kind of a methodology for applying a multiplier accounting for how much your tracker misses?
-
@laurenshof so do you have some kind of a methodology for applying a multiplier accounting for how much your tracker misses?
@ikuturso i used to be a data analyst in previous jobs, what youre doing is asking the same type of questions PMs would ask me if the reporting gave results they didnt like
trying to tweak the methology wont magically make an uncomfortable number more comfortable -
@ikuturso yeah, theres really only one server where them not reporting mau makes a meaningful difference, and thats misskey.social. i had a post from summer 2024 i think where i estimated them at 250k mau at that point based on total post count, but havent done the analysis since
@laurenshof I assume you mean misskey.io here but I wonder why you think only that instance can matter when most of them do not report it and the rest do make up for like 450k users compared to misskey.io's 750k.
