@dansup I don't 100% agree. Motivations from the developers (who at the end, will take decisions over the software) are important. If those are tied by investors, that may be a problem...
@dansup BlueSky is a for profit company, it can't last forever in its current state, eventually they will need to monetize their user base or it will disappear.
On the other hand, the Mastodon network is largely nonprofit, meaning instances will last as long as the passion and donations do.
On the contrary.
The walled gardens have not gone away with the fediverse. At all.
In fact there are more walled gardens than ever before. Every #Mastodon instance is its OWN walled garden, in terms of discoverability. Search is cordoned off: you can’t find anything for the most part except whatever might have been posted to your own walled garden and only if recent.
Talk of “freedom” is lovely but the reality is Mastodon is like a spy agency with severely compartmentalized info.
@dansup an open social web
Of course not every node will be connected to each other
@dansup Agree 💯
We should be thinking in terms of collaboration, not competition.
The essence of federation is a union of different entities, along with shared and divided powers and responsibilities.
Open means being open in every sense, especially open minded.
The common foe that must be conquered is closed, corporate social. If open social is divided, then *it* will be conquered.
Implementation doesn't matter as much as interoperability.