There's a pernicious belief, widely believed, that if a platform isn't on its way to becoming the biggest platform then it's on its way to failing. That belief is silly. So let's stop talking about Bluesky as if that belief is true.

Every time X stumbles, Bluesky gets narrated as a "refuge." As long as this metaphor persists, Bluesky cannot be evaluated as its own ecosystem. A refuge is subordinate to what it shelters from. $sT3m0

"but where are all the bluesky instances?" i've heard this so many times that i wrote an explainer

Current platforms are trying to be the only place you hangout. In the real world, we call that a trap. Bluesky is a distribution engine — we send people to off platform experiences. Go read that blog on @beehiiv.com or watch the livestream on @stream.place.

I don't have time to write about this, but the idea that Bluesky is a far left social network is standard propaganda in the culture war to neutralize Bluesky's influence on politics. This narrative is a routine trap designed to force Bluesky to give ground to the far right. (1/4)

Tired of letting legacy platforms decide what you see? On Bluesky, you can reclaim your algorithm. Learn how ⇊

Bluesky is the only mainstream social media platform on the planet where an independent individual can permissionlessly create their own custom algorithmic feed, host it on their own equipment, and have it be responsible for 4% of the entire network’s post views

To be honest, I think this is more the ruling class in America manifesting that bluesky fails, rather than bluesky actually failing because they know they can't control it just by buying it out.

Excited to share our new research demo, where you can freely traverse the world of Bluesky through 20,000 interconnected trails, spanning “analysis of fictional tropes” to “rotisserie chicken” to “zoning and land use policy.” Try it out, and let us know what you think!