A couple of weeks ago, I wrote at The Torment Nexus about whether Bluesky could become the new Twitter, and whether that would be a good thing or not. Since then, the network has just continued to ramp up its growth — it now has more than 23 million members, up from 15 million when I wrote that first piece — and so I wanted to go a little bit deeper and look under the hood at how Bluesky actually works, and how that compares not just to something like Twitter or Threads but also to other social networks such as Mastodon that are often referred to as “federated” or “decentralized.” Before I do, I should note that I am not a programmer or social networking expert, and so it’s entirely possible that I may describe some of this inaccurately or just plain get things wrong and for that I apologize in advance. But I think the differences in how they are perceived versus how they actually work are important.
A network like Twitter or Threads is relatively easy to understand. There’s a company that owns everything (including the actual user accounts, as Elon Musk is arguing in a brief related to The Onion’s acquisition of InfoWars) and it controls who gets to post, what they get to say, where the messages go, and so on. If Meta or Musk want to make the network either unusable or actively hostile, or nuke your account and everything you’ve ever said and all the contacts you’ve made, there is absolutely nothing you can do about it. This fits the definition of centralized pretty well. Yes, you can export your tweets etc., but it is difficult (but not impossible) to import them into some other network, and even if you do you lose any related content and connections.
Note: In case you are a first-time reader, or you forgot that you signed up for this newsletter, this is The Torment Nexus. You can find out more about me and this newsletter — and why I chose to call it that — in this post. This newsletter survives solely on your contributions, so please sign up for a paying subscription or visit my Patreon, which you can find here.
This structure makes it a relative no-brainer to use and understand, and I think that helps explain why Threads has more than 275 million accounts (according to Threads honcho Adam Mosseri, in November alone the network added the same number of accounts as Bluesky had in total). But having an account is one thing, and actually using it is another — you’ll notice that I said Threads has 275 million accounts rather than users, and that’s because, despite its size, the activity level on Threads seems to be significantly lower than on Bluesky. According to estimates from Similarweb, daily use on Bluesky hit 3.5 million recently, while on Threads it was just over 4 million, despite the fact that Threads has an order of magnitude more users than Bluesky does.
Note: This is a version of my Torment Nexus newsletter, which I send out via Ghost, the open-source publishing platform. You can see other issues and sign up here.
Continue reading “Is Bluesky really decentralized? It’s complicated”