No, post it.
Discussion
The important part are the big circles in the bottom left. The PDS is an instance. Instead of transmitting content directly to one another, they communicate through giant content aggregators called BGS, which is owned by Blue Sky. These are radically inefficient by design, so only big companies will be able to run the BGS.
Basically, it would be like if everything you poasted had to go through an instance like Poast or Mastodon Social first to federate to other instances. It’s not censorship resistant at all. It’s barely decentralized.
This diagram bit over my helmet to fully understand. #[5] have ya seen this?
Yes. nostr:npub1hg5g87620a3vhpgmna2pzevhj88lkt3lezus76p7u5y37sfcszsszktya9 and nostr:npub1qmh6kt08whkds7cy6k7rx6wzwvev6pwuwn3zsekd3f6nxz9qayvqzwlw6s read it the same way I did. This is what I was referring to earlier when I mentioned my "technical opinion."
BlueSky is literally Mastodon 2.0 with Fediblock included. The BGS had control over what gets seen. So even if you run a PDS (Personal Data Server) it doesn't mean anyone will ever be able to see or communicate with you. You have to run a BGS, which means running a whole service, which is complicated and expensive, and which would end up an island just like defederated instances.
From their explainer, it actually sounds like they expect them to be more difficult to run. Mastodon, Pleroma, etc are not that hard to get running...
Was this part of a larger document that I missed?