Open Social

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

ATProto vs Mastodon/ActivityPub

  • ATProto is presented as aiming for “global aggregation”: appviews index the whole network so everyone sees consistent replies, like counts, etc.
  • Critics of Mastodon/ActivityPub argue its “many webapps emailing each other” model yields fragmented UX and can’t match closed platforms’ features or performance.
  • Skeptics worry ATProto’s aggregation layer recreates centralization: big appviews/relays become new chokepoints vulnerable to “enshittification.”
  • Others reply that:
    • Users can still index only subsets (e.g. just people you follow).
    • PDS (personal data servers) are cheap to self‑host; full-network appviews are optional and already run by small groups.
    • The main UX win is: sign up like a normal app, then later move your data/hosting without breaking links.

Identity, Domains, and “Ownership”

  • Identity in ATProto is tied to DIDs (e.g. did:plc) with domains as human‑friendly handles; you can:
    • Move your repository (PDS) between hosts.
    • Change domains without breaking links, as links use DIDs.
  • Some argue owning a domain is still just renting from centralized registrars and subject to law and politics.
  • Thread explores “free TLD” ideas (subdomains, blockchain DNS, .onion, IPv6 space); recurring problems:
    • Abuse, phishing, spam.
    • Governance and who subsidizes infrastructure.
    • Prior “free” domains (.tk, .FREE, Freenom) ended badly.

User Demand, Harm, and Incentives

  • Many participants think 99% of users don’t care about protocols; they want frictionless sign‑up and engaging feeds.
  • Bluesky is praised for hiding ATProto under a familiar UX, and for surfacing user-facing wins (custom feeds, pluggable moderation, login across apps).
  • Debate over whether users really care about “data ownership”:
    • One side: people mostly want entertainment and don’t mind disposable content.
    • Other side: posts are history and social capital; the ability to walk away without losing everything changes platform incentives.
  • Broader argument about whether social media is inherently harmful vs just badly implemented under ad-driven capitalism.

Privacy, Moderation, and Abuse

  • ATProto today is for public data; private/semi‑private records are a planned extension (likely via scoped auth and encryption).
  • Architecture makes all events globally visible to indexers; this complicates “private likes” and similar features.
  • Moderation is modular:
    • Anyone can run label/moderation services; users opt into lists.
    • Blocking is a record in your repo; clients/appviews are expected to enforce it.
  • Concerns remain about culture‑war content and brigading across all networks; custom algorithms, communities, and moderation layers are seen as partial mitigations.

ActivityPub, Nostr, and Alternatives

  • ActivityPub is defended as simpler, cheaper, and better suited to small communities; it can in principle support shared identities and clients, but most implementations don’t use that part.
  • Some think AP’s lack of a single global view is a feature: it limits virality and encourages skepticism about “global” metrics.
  • Nostr is noted as another flexible protocol (blogs, chat, streaming), but key management, spammy default feeds, and Bitcoin associations are drawbacks.

Developer and Ecosystem Questions

  • Developers are experimenting with:
    • Personal sites backed by ATProto.
    • ATProto-based blogs, GitHub‑like and Patreon‑like apps, and comment systems.
  • Lexicons (schemas) enforce structure and app “culture” (e.g. post length, attachment types); there’s a community effort for shared lexicons.
  • Some see ATProto as “next‑gen RSS”: typed, signed feeds that many apps can aggregate and remix; others prefer building on plain HTML/microformats and the existing web.