• Foni@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Are these details really that important? Is it really that difficult to manually block 50-100 users? I don’t know, everything you are telling me are, at best, marginal improvements that do not justify selling all your personal data to a private company seeking profit from those data/contributions.

    CC @JaymesRS@literature.cafe

    • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      16 hours ago

      It is literally night and day for queer people. Large accounts can’t post about queer subjects on Twitter without harassment anymore due to how the algorithm works, but if you subscribe to a couple of block lists on Bluesky that is GONE. You might run into the odd freak, but community run block lists will keep the tide at bay.

      When Mastodon takes user safety practices as seriously as Bluesky does I’ll consider switching.

      • Foni@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        25 minutes ago

        Ok. You are in a situation of harassment and you believe that giving your data and delegating your security to a private company that responds to economic interests is a viable long-term solution.

        There are things that one cannot argue against

    • garretble@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      18 hours ago

      All I’m saying is that the moderation tools are NOT the same.

      Manually blocking hundreds of people (where those people can still see your posts [how twitter does it]) instead of subscribing to one list isn’t the same, and being able to remove your quoted posts from some troll is not the same.

      There is an argument to be had about who funding the app and what that means, but there’s no denying that Bluesky’s moderation tools from the user level are streets ahead of anything twitter has ever done.

      • Foni@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Ok, I haven’t denied that, the tools are different (I don’t even know Twitter’s tools very well), I debate whether that is worth enough to accept that it is centralized. If over time they consider that something else is more profitable, they will change the moderation tools, have no doubt.

        • garretble@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          17 hours ago

          Coincidentally, the CEO of bluesky posted this infographic today. Maybe some of these things will not hold up in the long run, but we’ll see.

          https://files.mastodon.social/cache/media_attachments/files/113/478/385/983/255/387/original/47310b3e334f918c.jpeg

          They have recently said that they are going to have a subscription model for some extra features to curb the need to throw in ads and whatnot. We’ll definitely see how that all works. But I do feel like they might be at least trying to set up a business model that doesn’t totally suck. All to be determined at this point.

          • Foni@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            23 minutes ago

            Personally I think that financing a platform like this with premium subscriptions is illusory. I could be wrong but what are they going to offer as a premium?

            I think it may be interesting to note that Spotify is closing its first green year in its history this year, for reference.