Bluesky Social

What is going on with Bluesky social? Supposedly it is the next big thing, but I cannot find details about it that aren't in promotional pieces. Looking in the Delaware filings, I found the filing number, but can't retrieve any other information about it. Under delaware law, a public benefit corporation is supposed to disclose their mission statement and their proposed benefits. I can't find that document. They don't appear to have SEC 10-K filings under their name, but I don't know if that is just because Public benefit corporations are exempt or what. The name, Bluesky is derived from their CEO's name very clearly, but it also overlaps with Bluesky laws and Bluesky filings, so that those search terms obfuscate any searches for information about the corporation. The CEO is someone who seems almost to have been made up. They have a short wiki bio, but their personal homepage is supposedly a dangerous site, according to Google. They were placed in the position by Jack Dorsey, then he left the outfit. Wikipedia is the best resource but they don't have the full goods.

The link in the filing listing for Delaware just returns me to the same page. Trying to find details on Google ends up returning a bunch of irrelevant results related to Bluesky laws in general.

Attempting to find out anything via a google search is useless. Here is the search results for the Bluesky social certificate of incorporation. There is the AI overview, which reports that the company was incorporated. To the side are some of the news articles about the company and the wiki page. Below there are the terms of service, the code base, the app, a bunch of suggested questions for google, wiki again, the site again, a news article about it, and then finally something that looks like it might be about the corporate info. Instead it is about Blue Sky filings 'in general'. Thus the name serves to make searches useless. Next a puff piece by the intercept asking if Bluesky is billionaire proof. It certainly seems to be human search proof. These other news stories report that the company was incorporated, so does the AI, but I can't find out where this information is coming from aside from the filing number.

This is the personal site for the CEO linked from Google.

>>81471 >but their personal homepage is supposedly a dangerous site, according to Google That's because it's being redirected to a parked domain.

Now the delaware listing is working properly, it wasn't before. Here is the filing - I am trying to find their statement of purpose or whatever, or a 10-K, but I don't know how at this point.

I don't know if they are a public or private company. When I search for that information, what I find instead is that they are a 'public benefit' corporation, and questions about this instead default to the issue of whether the corporation has opened accounts to the public (i.e. made the service publicly available). Their own social media has some more information about investors.

>The name, Bluesky is derived from their CEO's name very clearly The name Bluesky appeared, iirc, in 2019 or even before, when Jay wasn't CEO. Proof: https://web.archive.org/web/20191211141316/https://twitter.com/jack/status/1204766078468911106 (last tweet at the bottom, "@bluesky" is mentioned) >The CEO is someone who seems almost to have been made up. They have a short wiki bio, but their personal homepage is supposedly a dangerous site, according to Google. She just stopped paying for her domain and some domain reseller grabbed it, as usual. She isn't "made up", you can find videos of her speaking while she worked at ZCash: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQV31-K3Qyg >Supposedly it is the next big thing, but I cannot find details about it that aren't in promotional pieces. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AT_Protocol

Was it just a coincidence then that the CEO's name corresponds to the company name? Or did it get named after Lantian before it was separated from twitter? I understand there is video of Jay speaking. By not a real person, I mean the small wiki bio, the previous absence of presence. Jay was appointed by Jack Dorsey and then he left. She seems more like a figurehead. "We eventually landed on Jay [Graber]. She seemed great, and we decided to fund her. Around that time, I was also planning my exit [from Twitter], and Parag [Agarwal] was going to take over. And when Elon made the offer to buy the company, I think she had this general fear of — what do we do? Like, is there any way that the funding could be taken back? We gave them $14 million to work on the protocol." -From techdirt article I know about the AT protocol, I am talking about the corporation, that's what I'm looking for. Corporate filings, board of directors. Some of the board of directors are listed on Wiki. I don't know if that is all of them. This website/protocol is apparently going to become prominent, given the number of people switching over right now, so I was surprised that the information about it is primarily from 'promotional' sources or magazines/news articles. I wanted to find primary sources. What I am worried about is that the statement of public benefit in their filing would be something that isn't quite as pleasant as all of their press coverage suggests, or else that some members of their directors would actually still be connected to Musk's twitter. Musk is now X, while Bluesky, which is completely separate, also has decided to brand as an X (a butterfly of course), so it would be the ultimate joke if millions of people fled X for a rebranded X.

Found more info here. Im too tired to summarize but it mentions it's origin and team members and source codes on github. https://newsletter.pragmaticengineer.com/p/bluesky-engineering-culture

All I know about BlueSky is that the founder was the founder of Twitter, Jack Dorsey, after he left Twitter. Although he eventually BlueSky recently because they were “literally repeating all the mistakes we made” at Twitter." Frankly, people like me are done with social media. All I ever had was Facebook unless LinkedIn and GroupMe count as social media. Even then, I'm going to delete LinkedIn soon for the same reason that I deleted Facebook. I have no idea how to get rid of GroupMe. I hope that Microsoft just pulls the plug on it.

If I can't use it with Tor browser I don't use it at all. Bluesky isn't worth my time. Let the suits and control-freaks and moneygrubbers keep it.

That looks like corporate mastodon. Am I missing something?

Their rules are very vague. Im only hoping Mastodon takes some ideas from Bluesky to improve how they work and get improved popularity due to the bit of interoperability of Bluesky with Mastodon. Bluesky is still private company and even if you make your own site with the AT Protocol it is still in domain of a company that can pull the rug out from under you.

>>81630 simple as

>>81642 you and the person who made that completely misunderstand the point of tor

>>81643 Do summarize the point of Tor. I think Tor support is a valid litmus test to see how much e.g. Bluesky glows, what level of surveillance can be expected despite the image of decentralization and public good. Small services blocking anonymous access, understandable from a business perspective, they can't waste money jannying all the trolls, or developing and supporting proper Tor access which nobody will use. Large companies could easily afford to do a privacy gold standard Tor onion JavaScript-free front if they wanted. Don't tell me companies who can lay off hundreds on a whim can't spare a few nerds to implement it. Afraid of troll overflow? Require a Monero deposit or an expensive proof-of-work challenge which is lost on ban.

>>81640 >even if you make your own site with the AT Protocol it is still in domain of a company that can pull the rug out from under you. The AT protocol was designed to prevent corpo rugpulling of user data. You can host your own data on your own PDS which is interoperable with the main Bluesky service, or you can ask someone else to host it. In the latter case, you retain control of the account because you can adversarially migrate it to a new server with a private key, at least in theory. I think you're referring to the practice of making a domain name resolve to a DID? The DID document is this new standard for building a Decentralized IDentifier, and currently Bluesky lets you resolve a domain to a DID you control, which is how you get handles like @bsky.app, etc. It's all in the docs, people.

Last time I checked bsky only had vague future plans for decentralization, nothing concrete; that didn't inspire confidence in me. If they managed to add it, I'm really impressed.

>>81672 isn't the AT protocol proprietary? sounds interesting but fediverse already exists.

>>81468 i have yet to find someone use bluesky with another instance than bluesky.social, probably another soykafty twitter made by the same guy who sold said platform

>>81473 >I am trying to find their statement of purpose or whatever, or a 10-K, but I don't know how at this point. You're $20 away from getting the information you're looking for - their latest corporate filing documents.

>>81699 Yeah. I don't really know what bluesky is trying to achieve rather than being a less soykafty twitter. Seeing alot of artists and folks fed up with twitter moving to bluesky. I don't have a use to make an account there, yet, so I'm just watching it all unfold seeing what will happen.

>>81638 No. It's just full of artists who migrated from X because Musk said that xAI will scrape anything from Twitter.

It's ActivityPub for people who are addicted to twitter and require a constant feed of corpo-curated slop injected into their eyeballs every moment of every day. Straight garbage.

>>81652 >Large companies could easily afford to do a privacy gold standard Tor onion JavaScript-free front if they wanted I've been using Bluesky since they stopped being invite-only. Just use a torrified VM and turn JS on. You're not enough of a worthy target to justify them burning a 0day + VM escape to identify you lmao. You're just a kid larping as a secret agent or some soykaf. Grow up. Anyway, I've been using Bluesky this way, and it's refreshing to have access to a non-soykafty (cf mastodon) social network on Tor, without the need to verify my identity via phone, just giving them a cockli or onionmail address. >>81638 >That looks like corporate mastodon. Am I missing something? It's kind of is, yea Biggest difference is, you can switch instance without losing all your soykaf. And it's easier to host a single-user instance. But way more centralized than mastodon. But, anyway, Bluesky is kind of crap in general.

>>81706 Enjoy, until they take away anonymous accounts when they don't need it for user acquisition and KPI pump anymore. Spam will become a nuisance and rather than solve it in novel ways, they'll reach for the ol' banhammer. >Bluesky Safety noted on November 16, "In the past 24 hours, we have received more than 42,000 reports (an all-time high for one day). We're receiving about 3,000 reports/hour. To put that into context, in all of 2023, we received 360k reports." There's the perfect excuse. Wonder which IPs get axed first. >Grow up. = Accept the soykafty reality, don't dare dream? I'm aware of how web services work, I can imagine how business decisions and development are done, why my idealistic idea will never get implemented. For me this status quo of the modern web just doesn't spark joy. Don't tell me you'd vote no on the option of a JS-free or very JS-light, Nitter-like hidden service (or clearnet site) for Bluesky, no phone numbers, no emails. This comes with privacy tinfoil hat guarantees, but it's also cool, efficient, doesn't harm the user in any way. Charge $20, $100 XMR for an account, I'd still prefer and appreciate it. What I can't figure out is if it doesn't have ads or paid tiers, how is Bluesky supposed to make money? $13M from Twitter, $8M seed funding, $15M Series A. With development and operations burning money, why is a stake in Bluesky valuable to investors? Plans of exploitation and enshittification as usual? Apparently subscriptions are planned, doesn't sound very profitable though: >In addition, we will begin developing a subscription model for features like higher quality video uploads or profile customizations like colors and avatar frames https://techcrunch.com/2024/10/24/bluesky-raises-15m-series-a-plans-to-launch-subscriptions/

>>81709 bye bye forever picrel GTFO idol junior loving ass

>Apparently subscriptions are planned, doesn't sound very profitable though: It could be. Niconico is still alive

>>81709 >how is Bluesky supposed to make money? The value will be there if it continues to appear to be upending X. Twitter itself kept chugging even though it only ever made a profit like twice.

>>81718 >Twitter itself kept chugging even though it only ever made a profit like twice. Sadly because it is fueled by an egomaniac with other sources of revenue, last time I checked. >>81709 >discord-esque subscription model Uuughhhh. This is like kicking dead whales down the beach. How about someone makes a plugin that let's us upload a CSS template for one owns profile, eh? Who cares for higher video uploads on fuarrrking "not twitter"?

>>81711 hold your censormaxx, picrel is marie kondo, middle-aged

>>81723 >Sadly because it is fueled by an egomaniac with other sources of revenue, last time I checked. That figure comes from before his acquisition. Even now with the value free falling by billions it doesn’t matter bc it was just a $44b campaign contribution.

>>81723 >guys I just figured out that it doesn't matter if media platforms make money or not because billionaires use them to manipulate public opinion and boost profits in other companies they own Congratulations. At some point you're going to figure out there were no WMDs in Iraq and Ivermectin does work. >>81711 >bye bye forever What are you doing out in the real world. Go back and respond to my movie thread <-P94578

>>81734 It so weird how people interpret this as anything but. Like, hes a multibillionare? He'll never not have any creature comfort he desires, he could burn the money and nothing would change that.

>>81723 >elon musk twitter wasnt profitable before musk either. IDK considering how many people they fired its possible they're even doing better now, but private so idk.

>>81787 Twitter is almost certainly even more of a financial blackhole now then it was when it was bought, lost all the good advertisers, hemorrhaging users, associated with cp and extreme content, etc. etc. Turns out it doesn't matter and Musk doesn't care, he bought it for the influence, and viewed that way it was a good deal. Musk is a gross little rat man but he obviously isn't stupid.

>>81787 Even Amazon wasn't profitable. How these companies operate is by getting a steady flow of investors coming in. >>81724 >Middle aged She's only a middle aged child you sick fuarrrk, 80 year old of age adults only.

>>81788 The plan was to get Trump elected from the start lmao. I don't know how people don't realize that. (Side note: I'm not anti nor pro Trump as I'm European and don't really care, it's just obvious) Same way billionaires, in every country on earth, buy newspapers and big media. It's not to turn a profit on it. It's to gain influence and make money elsewhere. He used Twitter to push Trump propaganda. It's a fact. Musk made something like 20B since the election lmao, and it's just a start. Who the fuarrrk cares if Twitter isn't profitable.