洪 民憙 (Hong Minhee) 
While I have no ill will toward the “ATmosphere” (Bluesky/AT Protocol), the contrast in funding models is hard to ignore. The fediverse's support from strategic investments in open infrastructure (like NLnet or STF) feels far healthier than ATmosphere's heavy backing from crypto-linked VCs—a sector often fraught with bubbles and social harm. I'm a bit envious of their smooth R&D resources, but I'm ultimately convinced that building on a foundation of digital public goods is the more sustainable path for a truly decentralized web.
Fabrice Desré@hongminhee None of these funding models are healthy actually. Applying for grants every year or so is very fragile, and VC money comes with shackles. But you have to recognize that there is a lot more built on the ATProto side currently than on AP/Mastodon.
@fabrice You're right that constant grant-hopping is fragile, and I don't see it as a perfect endgame. However, my point about “healthiness” was less about financial stability and more about the alignment of incentives.
VC money inevitably demands a return on investment, which often leads to extractive business models down the line. I'd rather deal with the administrative “fragility” of public funding than the structural “shackles” of venture capital that might eventually compromise protocol neutrality. AT Protocol's rapid development is impressive, but for me, who owns the infrastructure is just as important as how fast it's being built.
@hongminhee Fair points overall, but it's not just administrative fragility that comes with grants funding: it's constant overhead for builders, burning out, things that never even start.
@fabrice I hear your concerns about burnout, and as someone who has actually secured STF investment for my project (Fedify), I won't pretend the administrative overhead is non-existent. It's a real challenge.
However, in my experience, that effort is a price well worth paying for the autonomy and long-term value it secures. For me, navigating “administrative fragility” is a manageable hurdle compared to the structural risk of VC influence. It's not about finding a perfect, effortless funding source—it's about choosing which struggles are worth our time to preserve the integrity of the decentralized web.
Nelfaneor 🇪🇺 🇧🇪 🫏✒️♏〽️🟤@hongminhee
Without mentioning that the administrative fragility could be reduced as more and more people and overall, corporate business circles are discerning the dangers of hegemonic tech powers and consequently, could lean on public authorities to allocate enough public money into this development or to foster good incentives for many entities to sustain this development.
@fabrice
Without mentioning that the administrative fragility could be reduced as more and more people and overall, corporate business circles are discerning the dangers of hegemonic tech powers and consequently, could lean on public authorities to allocate enough public money into this development or to foster good incentives for many entities to sustain this development.
@fabrice
@nelfan @hongminhee "could" is very load bearing in your comment... and that's exactly the problem: things could be better, but are not. Grants are short term, while ideally you would need eg. a 3 years commitment to compete with VC backing.