The TOS of #BlueSky read like the exact same surveillance bs that brought us into this mess. This sounds like a nightmare regarding privacy, data security, and ownership of your content. (Also, if you’re into eating the rich, that’s not exactly it… 😉) It’s basically against everything I value when it comes to the Open Web.

So I’ve decided to not sign up for BlueSky for now. I didn’t leave Twitter just to sign up for the next longtermist’s “decentralized” silo.

https://twitter.com/ashleygjovik/status/1651686218319425570?s=46&t=_Qq_97S6S5_k70bYSo_0lQ

Ashley M. Gjøvik on Twitter

“BlueSky Terms of Service gives Jack a 'perpetual' & 'irrevocable' license to all your content (posts, name, likeness, pics) BlueSky can delete your account for any reason, but may refuse to delete it if you ask You can't screenshot BlueSky All disputes = individual arbitration”

Twitter
@matthiasott @gstml this is pretty much US boilerplate TOS for a generic social media app, nothing to see there. They will definitely need to update it to clarify some parts and for GDPR compliance tho.
@maffeis @gstml 😁 Then maybe the US boilerplate TOS are not compatible with what I view as a respectful way to treat users, their data, and their intellectual property. But that’s part of the nature of the US economy and society. I am well aware that many people are fine with this and I might be a bit idealistic in that regard. 😉

@matthiasott @gstml Yeah, I agree! But unfortunately it is a bit what it is. It's a lawyers’ country. :(

I find it pretty disingenuous tho that she is posting that on twitter dot com…

@maffeis @matthiasott why? She wanted an audience. Not this vacuum chamber.
Twitter Terms of Service

Read Twitter’s Terms of Service to understand the rules governing your access of all Twitter services.

@gstml @matthiasott but anyway, people from Bluesky responded on Twitter saying that the current ToS is essentially boilerplate, and that they will clarify it more in the future.
@maffeis @matthiasott it won't be much different than Twitter and such. I don't see the problem honestly. Content rights? Who am I, Stephen King?

@gstml @matthiasott they said the main reason why that part is there is for automatic moderation and PR purposes. I agree that it should be more specific, but personally I am choosing to give them the benefit of doubt, for now.

I care more of what they will do to evolve the protocol and the platform. Soon we'll see how federation and moderation will work in practice.

@maffeis @matthiasott point me to a Chrome extension with an AI that summarizes it all. Still, she wanted to be read and possibly have an impact. I guess she succeed, the echo propagated to the Mastodon's ionosphere.
@gstml @matthiasott yeah, understandable. Which is the main reason it will not matter that much in the end (that we like it or not).
@matthiasott @maffeis I personally welcome any critical perspective on the matter, I think it's very healthy. But, I also think you go a bit too far, especially since you don't point to a valid alternative – no, the Fediverse as it is is not. Unless you openly declare that you're talking idealistically, in which case you can go as far as you want.