Bluesky is the reason I’m pretty much over with the idea of ever convincing people to worry about privacy, digital freedom or societal issues at large.

Twitter was bad, became even worse, people wanted to migrate - sure. We had Mastodon, which worked perfectly, was Federated, was open for subscriptions, it was free, had working third party apps and a community already. Barely anybody migrated.

Then Bluesky shows up, and it’s the exact same technology, only more limited and with lesser freedoms… but because it’s a commercial company behind it, people immediately chose it. The argument that people don’t understand federation doesn’t even work, because the promise that Bluesky was going to participate in the Fediverse was even part of the marketing material.

People CRAVE big tech. They’re not victims of abuse or ignorance, they’re willing participants that would rather be enslaved by a corporation than use any collaborative effort.

You blame Humanity’s nature, and thus devalue the truly big difference, just one of this social network has millions and millions invested in marketing.

Bluesky barely had any effective marketing at all. Their main push was word of mouth and the “exclusivity” of launching under a invite-only system. That’s it.

But “oh, this big tech wants my data and not yours” was enough.

In a world full of bots where machines can pass the Turing test, how do you know if this word of mouth wasn’t actually a marketing campaign? The “exclusivity” thing was surely one.

It’s clear that advertising has a lot of power to influence people’s choices, otherwise oligarchs wouldn’t burn so much money on it.

Marketing, advertising, etc. It’s a science, a field of study. What is the goal? To make people buy things, ostensibly. How do they chose to do achieve that goal? Deep analysis of the human psyche and studying methods to manipulate them into taking intended actions.

Advertising the science of psychological warfare.