There are no instances in ATProto

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Network architecture & “no instances”

  • ATProto splits roles into Personal Data Servers (PDS), AppViews, and optional Relays; hosting and applications are decoupled.
  • Relays are described as a performance optimization, not a fundamental piece: they rebroadcast events from many PDSes to many AppViews.
  • Some commenters argue this is semantic: PDSes, AppViews, and Relays still act like “instances” in practice, just grouped differently.
  • RSS/Google Reader analogies help some readers; others find them misleading because ATProto apps are server-side aggregators with strong control over what users see.

Comparison with ActivityPub / Mastodon

  • ActivityPub/Mastodon instances bundle identity, hosting, UI, and moderation, which:
    • Makes decentralization tangible (thousands of servers, users spread out).
    • But ties you to an instance and makes migration and scaling harder.
  • ATProto aims for:
    • Stable identity via DIDs and easier migration between hosts and apps.
    • A shared, typed data model so many apps can reuse and remix the same content.
  • Critics counter that, today, ATProto’s ecosystem is effectively dominated by one provider (Bluesky) in a way Mastodon is not.

Moderation, censorship, and governance

  • ATProto moderation happens at multiple layers: hosting, AppViews, relays, plus standardized “labeler” services that apps can choose to use.
  • Example given: a user banned on the main Bluesky app remains visible via another AppView that rejects Bluesky’s moderation decisions.
  • Skeptics note:
    • If most users stay on the main Bluesky AppView, being banned there is still functionally silencing.
    • There is only one PLC directory today; governance is moving to a Swiss entity and into IETF, but centralization risk remains.
    • Some see ATProto as “decentr‑washing” until there are many independent, widely used AppViews.

Costs, self‑hosting, and scalability

  • PDSes are cheap and can run on small VPSs or even Raspberry Pi–class hardware.
  • Relays that mirror the whole network now reportedly run at ~$20–30/month; AppViews are only “expensive” if you try to replicate the global Bluesky index.
  • Supporters say this is affordable for hobbyist developers and enables a market of shared infra; critics argue that:
    • $30/month and ops effort are non‑trivial in many regions.
    • In practice, only a handful of relays and AppViews exist, keeping power concentrated.

User experience, culture, and adoption

  • Pro‑ATProto voices emphasize:
    • Better UX path for non‑technical users than “pick an instance” Fedi onboarding.
    • Ability to reuse one identity across very different apps (microblogging, blogs, code hosting, etc.).
  • Pro‑ActivityPub voices emphasize:
    • Proven, working decentralization with many independent servers and funding models.
    • Cultural resilience: if a big Mastodon server dies, the network mostly keeps going.
  • Open questions raised:
    • Whether ATProto will remain dominated by Bluesky or evolve into a genuinely multi‑provider ecosystem.
    • Whether technical portability will translate into real cultural and economic independence from the founding company.