Would be good to see >1 client on AT Protocol as it would get closer to the idea of decentralisation.
But I think we should also be careful on what we refer to as decentralisation. POS system lived up to the idea of decentralisation of blockchains, but it misused to pump and dump tokens. One reason Mozilla is going for Mastadon I’d reckon, is because they have full control over the users including viewing their private messages.
The nuances of the protocol in this case becomes critical.
Hi there, I found this podcast with Gigi really interesting as to why PoS can never achieve true decentralisation. Thought you might enjoy it. This podcast was the first time I’d heard it explained this way.
https://podcasts.apple.com/au/podcast/blue-collar-bitcoin-podcast/id1568863382?i=1000570468833
There technically are a few other clients, but only 1 or 2 of them (Flat and Skyline) look remotely mature, with the rest being very experimental. Even between those two, Flat is very very similar to Bluesky client in design, but with fewer features, so it doesn't add much other than giving another option.
I think it’s ok if AT Procol’s clients are similar by design but diff in management. And must not access user’s private data like mastodon does because it’s differentiates between the choices user have and the imposition a centralisation power has on the user. The last I checked at-protocol clients mostly forked from bluesky, so good that it’s diff now.
Fiatjaf’s question, has been lingering on my mind : what happens if conservative joins bluesky because it seems liberal.
I think from Nostr, conceptually, you can have clients A B C (refer to diagram)
Say A is liberal, B is conservative, C is neutral. Each can view others if they want to, choose which relays to read and write to. They can remain within their vicinity. It’s their choice.
I think being able to view other opinions will create a more balance and neutral society. And bring people closer. A centralised platform prevents that.
For example, let’s look at some controversial topic - is “woke” a bad thing ?
I’m from a country that restricts you by constitution from higher education and economic assistance (loans, equity investment, grants) if you are a minority. When I was an engineer, I was the only female and minority in my field covering several countries, the amount of sexual harassment was a norm. I was lucky i had a group of men I worked with who kept me safe physically. ‘Me too’ movement actually reduced that harm drastically. But at the same time I’ve also seen people abuse these situations - for example if you genuinely underperform but blame it on discrimination. Where’s the balance?
If you look at something conservative for example LGBTQ. In the Bible, Quran - it say you are going to hell. My late dad was a reverend, my mom’s a pastor, I grew in a very conservative Christian environment. When I was young in a school debate team, i was given a motion to advocate gay couple’s right to adopt. My first thought was I’m going to hell. After that debate, I thought what a shitty person I was deciding how someone else should live.
Coming out of that bubble and understanding someone else made all the difference to me. And I think that’s what’s missing in the world today.
As of now, it’s an extreme case in the US - extreme left or extreme right. It was worse when trump was around but it hasn’t balanced out.
People don’t speak to each other or hear each other’s views. Centralised social media blocks it because restricted by whichever gov’t who decides on how they should impose on the people.
Ultimately it doesn’t matter Nostr or AT - even with both the protocols it’s not enough to handle ~200 countries who have been used to ruling over their people for centuries.
Pushing for AT to be decentralised is done with good intentions.
So as long as people get to speak up and their voices heard, it’s going to make a huge diff in the world - and it will make the world a better place.
