Folker

@folkerschamel
117 Followers
194 Following
968 Posts
Not a big user of social networks, but it seems that when I do take part in discussions, I seem to like to advocate for social networks to be open, decentralized and interoperable.

Did you also notice the pattern?

If something goes wrong using an #AI, people always blame the user:
Your prompt was bad. You didn't use AI to optimize the prompt. Flawed CLAUDE.md. Insufficient context window. Wrong #LLM temperature. Inadequate training data. Just change a single comma as described in my Medium article no 4632 to be as successful as me.

Nobody says: Hey, #ML and LLMs are not classical computers anymore. They are inherently not reliable. And this is really NOT your fault.

We are alarmed by reports that Germany is on the verge of a catastrophic about-face, reversing its longstanding and principled opposition to the EUโ€™s Chat Control proposal which, if passed, could spell the end of the right to privacy in Europe. https://signal.org/blog/pdfs/germany-chat-control.pdf

A glimpse into the Bridgy Fed monitoring dashboards. Pretty conventional mix of infra, OS, and app level metrics.

Note the delay numbers. When you do something in one network, how quickly do we bridge it across? We pay a lot of attention to that, we try hard to keep it as fast as possible!

I wish we could make these dashboards public! Google Cloud Monitoring doesnโ€™t support that right now; hopefully they will eventually.

It'd be really healthy if we could decluster away from such a large share of the network existing on systems run by Bluesky Social PBC.
I think the main problem we face isn't the *technology*, but the *current ecosystem*, and knowledge related to it. If you asked your average Bluesky user, "How could you get around the Mississippi ban?", they'd have no idea, whereas your average Mastodon user would know right away what to do.

@folkerschamel @mmasnick.bsky.social @Gargron @stinerman @ikuturso

Again. Rather than engage with the substance of the article, MM's approach is to brush it aside with sweeping generalizations, false characterizations and ad hominem attacks. There is nothing untrue in the article. It is a good characterization of the benefits of real decentralization. Benefits that Bluesky and Mike Masnick often disingenuously trumpet when talking about "No Caesars" and the ability to "fork off."

@mmasnick @folkerschamel @mmasnick.bsky.social

Specifically, what is the company doing to enable independent instances and provide the type of choice your marketing ballyhoos? What are your goals for achieving a meaningful percentage of the AT Protocol network users NOT being Bluesky PBC users? What programs are you sponsoring to achieve these ends? Are you serious about these goals?

3/

@mmasnick @folkerschamel @mmasnick.bsky.social

Rather than making false and misleading arguments you could instead stipulate that the overwhelming dominance Bluesky PBC does currently make AT Protocol a defacto centralized network, but the company recognizes this and are taking specific steps to address it. AT Protocol is designed to facilitate decentralization and list what steps are being taken, against what metrics to achieve real decentralization.

2/

@mmasnick @folkerschamel @mmasnick.bsky.social

This is a specious argument, and does not deserve a serious response. Please stop misrepresenting the current degree of centralized concentration of Bluesky PBC on AT Protocol. You are in a perfect position to advocate for actual meaningful decentralization, but instead continue to misrepresent the current overwhelming dominance of Bluesky PBC.

1/